Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (3644)
Preet DSouza <preet.desouza17@gmail.com> Sat, 08 June 2013 05:32 UTC
Return-Path: <preet.desouza17@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28AF421F8895 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 22:32:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.298, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MANGLED_NAIL=2.3, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ChRyFfEOZrem for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 22:32:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-x22e.google.com (mail-qc0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79ECF21F881F for <ospf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 22:32:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qc0-f174.google.com with SMTP id m15so1613616qcq.5 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Fri, 07 Jun 2013 22:32:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=183of4deCX1Jf+iiSKc9HkrTerbisu7QM+LE153TaBg=; b=Zzg4CZ2ABIwsXXcEavjlhcHENXXpAQGhgWpg3mpjo1YOCGRwL66ieNbh4cD6vHyXqJ s1w09MzJ7xpQihoTli2cqQfRD+4lQ3QObLtR4Gdph60k6N8pqNX68fKVvoK/7EWVHp1g dXVMeoSrAXRw0ON/qDLxaSUYaohwnfZRuCUsKrm1hn8N1zu4Z5hJ7KbQynAi9zFa+LnZ wftg2B2Waay52y8n1GAz3DiAEaJh8deNmNnl1ilXxhbGCMD/uamOoYXixqmRujkDpu3e oNJb5mhnPIDgTKtC83XFYbFt8JoXTtW2HpD/qmktYVyC7xXMfIhlCjCLuJej7RNhHOjU xQyQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.229.4.205 with SMTP id 13mr608618qcs.149.1370669523891; Fri, 07 Jun 2013 22:32:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.224.74.2 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 22:32:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <94A203EA12AECE4BA92D42DBFFE0AE4715F7DF@eusaamb101.ericsson.se>
References: <20130607194649.DFE7B62114@rfc-editor.org> <D05F4D3D-528F-4E6B-86AB-914A0CA8AE99@lindem.com> <CAFip=q7aXGkROUSFCBqU+ZtOF8PU6eZpBSy-E2PS34uTFHnOSg@mail.gmail.com> <CAFip=q5TjVzC7qO_sdJCCjXG-Vh+gMB4wGayH4XkY8vfuEuPEQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAFip=q53EJnuCDRr_TVgug1c=gS9fAXqAiVg95qoG+mXsA5=eQ@mail.gmail.com> <94A203EA12AECE4BA92D42DBFFE0AE4715F7DF@eusaamb101.ericsson.se>
Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2013 11:02:03 +0530
Message-ID: <CAFip=q5YK9NeT+=5x52YBy+rOEta3yKEe+Y_mBZp2QUFhmT4bQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Preet DSouza <preet.desouza17@gmail.com>
To: Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000e0ce0743c13802504de9dde61"
Cc: "<jmoy@casc.com>" <jmoy@casc.com>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (3644)
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ospf>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2013 05:32:06 -0000
Hello Acee,
I disagree.
To support my claim, I would like to draw your attention to Figure 1a.
"Network Map Components". Kindly refer to the first pair of figures located
at the top depicting the
network map on the left and the directed graph on the right for physical
point-to-point networks.
You will clearly notice the presence of an edge from each router to the
opposite router's interface in the directed graph. [ RT1 to Ib and
RT2 to Ia]
The explanation provided for point-to-point networks on Page [14] explains
this. It reads,
The top of Figure 1a shows two routers connected by a point-to-
point link. In the resulting link-state database graph, the two
router vertices are directly connected by a pair of edges, one
in each direction. Interfaces to point-to-point networks need
not be assigned IP addresses. *When interface addresses are
assigned, they are modelled as stub links, with each router
advertising a stub connection to the other router's interface
address.* Optionally, an IP subnet can be assigned to the point-
to-point network. In this case, both routers advertise a stub
link to the IP subnet, instead of advertising each others' IP
interface addresses.
Thanks
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com>wrote:
> Hi Preet,
> Figure 3 contains "The resulting directed graph". Since Ia and Ib are
> simply the endpoints of a point-to-point network, they do not represent
> vertexes in the directed graph and need not be included in figure 3. A
> point-to-point link is imply an edge in the graph. My recommendation is
> that your errata be rejected.
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
> On Jun 7, 2013, at 4:35 PM, Preet DSouza wrote:
>
> Kindly note that I've made a minor mistake in the RFC errata notes.
>
> It says,
>
> Notes:
>
> section 2.1.2
>
> Page 20, Figure 2 : A sample Autonomous System.
>
> The interfaces Ia and Ib have not been added to the directed graph.
> By definition of point-to-point links under OSPF, for serial interfaces
> defined by IP addresses,
> router RT6 should advertise a stub network to Ib whereas router RT6 should
> advertise a stub network to Ia .
>
>
> It should say,
>
> Notes:
>
> section 2.1.2
>
> Page 20, Figure 2 : A sample Autonomous System.
>
> The interfaces Ia and Ib have not been added to the directed graph.
> By definition of point-to-point links under OSPF, for serial interfaces
> defined by IP addresses,
> router RT6 should advertise a stub network to Ib whereas router *RT10*should advertise a stub network to Ia .
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 1:59 AM, Preet DSouza <preet.desouza17@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> The corrected text should be as under.
>> The additions are noted in bold.
>>
>> **FROM**
>>
>> |RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|
>> |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 |10|11|12|N3|N6|N8|N9|
>> ----- ---------------------------------------------
>> RT1| | | | | | | | | | | | |0 | | | |
>> RT2| | | | | | | | | | | | |0 | | | |
>> RT3| | | | | |6 | | | | | | |0 | | | |
>> RT4| | | | |8 | | | | | | | |0 | | | |
>> RT5| | | |8 | |6 |6 | | | | | | | | | |
>> RT6| | |8 | |7 | | | | |5 | | | | | | |
>> RT7| | | | |6 | | | | | | | | |0 | | |
>> * RT8| | | | | | | | | | | | | |0 | | |
>> * RT9| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |0 |
>> T RT10| | | | | |7 | | | | | | | |0 |0 | |
>> O RT11| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |0 |0 |
>> * RT12| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |0 |
>> * N1|3 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>> N2| |3 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>> N3|1 |1 |1 |1 | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>> N4| | |2 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>> N6| | | | | | |1 |1 | |1 | | | | | | |
>> N7| | | | | | | |4 | | | | | | | | |
>> N8| | | | | | | | | |3 |2 | | | | | |
>> N9| | | | | | | | |1 | |1 |1 | | | | |
>> N10| | | | | | | | | | | |2 | | | | |
>> N11| | | | | | | | |3 | | | | | | | |
>> N12| | | | |8 | |2 | | | | | | | | | |
>> N13| | | | |8 | | | | | | | | | | | |
>> N14| | | | |8 | | | | | | | | | | | |
>> N15| | | | | | |9 | | | | | | | | | |
>> H1| | | | | | | | | | | |10| | | | |
>> *Ia| | | | | | | | | |5 | | | | | | |**
>> Ib| | | | | |7 | | | | | | | | | | |*
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Preet DSouza <preet.desouza17@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Acee,
>>>
>>> I made two additions.
>>> The last two rows in the **To** column have been added.
>>> They are interfaces Ia and Ib which are represented as stub networks
>>> owing to their definition on a point-to-point link between RT6 and RT10
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 1:29 AM, Acee Lindem <acee@lindem.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Preet - Can you denote which boxes you changed and why? In its current
>>>> state, this errata should be summarily rejected.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Acee
>>>> On Jun 7, 2013, at 3:46 PM, RFC Errata System wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2328,
>>>> > "OSPF Version 2".
>>>> >
>>>> > --------------------------------------
>>>> > You may review the report below and at:
>>>> > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=2328&eid=3644
>>>> >
>>>> > --------------------------------------
>>>> > Type: Technical
>>>> > Reported by: Preet D'Souza <preet.desouza17@gmail.com>
>>>> >
>>>> > Section: 2.1.2
>>>> >
>>>> > Original Text
>>>> > -------------
>>>> > **FROM**
>>>> >
>>>> > |RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|
>>>> > |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 |10|11|12|N3|N6|N8|N9|
>>>> > ----- ---------------------------------------------
>>>> > RT1| | | | | | | | | | | | |0 | | | |
>>>> > RT2| | | | | | | | | | | | |0 | | | |
>>>> > RT3| | | | | |6 | | | | | | |0 | | | |
>>>> > RT4| | | | |8 | | | | | | | |0 | | | |
>>>> > RT5| | | |8 | |6 |6 | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > RT6| | |8 | |7 | | | | |5 | | | | | | |
>>>> > RT7| | | | |6 | | | | | | | | |0 | | |
>>>> > * RT8| | | | | | | | | | | | | |0 | | |
>>>> > * RT9| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |0 |
>>>> > T RT10| | | | | |7 | | | | | | | |0 |0 | |
>>>> > O RT11| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |0 |0 |
>>>> > * RT12| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |0 |
>>>> > * N1|3 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N2| |3 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N3|1 |1 |1 |1 | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N4| | |2 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N6| | | | | | |1 |1 | |1 | | | | | | |
>>>> > N7| | | | | | | |4 | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N8| | | | | | | | | |3 |2 | | | | | |
>>>> > N9| | | | | | | | |1 | |1 |1 | | | | |
>>>> > N10| | | | | | | | | | | |2 | | | | |
>>>> > N11| | | | | | | | |3 | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N12| | | | |8 | |2 | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N13| | | | |8 | | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N14| | | | |8 | | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N15| | | | | | |9 | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > H1| | | | | | | | | | | |10| | | | |
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Corrected Text
>>>> > --------------
>>>> > **FROM**
>>>> >
>>>> > |RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|RT|
>>>> > |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 |10|11|12|N3|N6|N8|N9|
>>>> > ----- ---------------------------------------------
>>>> > RT1| | | | | | | | | | | | |0 | | | |
>>>> > RT2| | | | | | | | | | | | |0 | | | |
>>>> > RT3| | | | | |6 | | | | | | |0 | | | |
>>>> > RT4| | | | |8 | | | | | | | |0 | | | |
>>>> > RT5| | | |8 | |6 |6 | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > RT6| | |8 | |7 | | | | |5 | | | | | | |
>>>> > RT7| | | | |6 | | | | | | | | |0 | | |
>>>> > * RT8| | | | | | | | | | | | | |0 | | |
>>>> > * RT9| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |0 |
>>>> > T RT10| | | | | |7 | | | | | | | |0 |0 | |
>>>> > O RT11| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |0 |0 |
>>>> > * RT12| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |0 |
>>>> > * N1|3 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N2| |3 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N3|1 |1 |1 |1 | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N4| | |2 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N6| | | | | | |1 |1 | |1 | | | | | | |
>>>> > N7| | | | | | | |4 | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N8| | | | | | | | | |3 |2 | | | | | |
>>>> > N9| | | | | | | | |1 | |1 |1 | | | | |
>>>> > N10| | | | | | | | | | | |2 | | | | |
>>>> > N11| | | | | | | | |3 | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N12| | | | |8 | |2 | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N13| | | | |8 | | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N14| | | | |8 | | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > N15| | | | | | |9 | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> > H1| | | | | | | | | | | |10| | | | |
>>>> > Ia| | | | | | | | | |5 | | | | | | |
>>>> > Ib| | | | | |7 | | | | | | | | | | |
>>>> >
>>>> > Notes
>>>> > -----
>>>> > section 2.1.2
>>>> >
>>>> > Page 20, Figure 2 : A sample Autonomous System.
>>>> >
>>>> > The interfaces Ia and Ib have not been added to the directed
>>>> graph.
>>>> > By definition of point-to-point links under OSPF, for serial
>>>> interfaces defined by IP addresses,
>>>> > router RT6 should advertise a stub network to Ib whereas router RT6
>>>> should advertise a stub network to Ia .
>>>> >
>>>> > Instructions:
>>>> > -------------
>>>> > This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
>>>> > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
>>>> > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)
>>>> > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>>>> >
>>>> > --------------------------------------
>>>> > RFC2328 (no draft string recorded)
>>>> > --------------------------------------
>>>> > Title : OSPF Version 2
>>>> > Publication Date : April 1998
>>>> > Author(s) : J. Moy
>>>> > Category : INTERNET STANDARD
>>>> > Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP
>>>> > Area : Routing
>>>> > Stream : IETF
>>>> > Verifying Party : IESG
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > OSPF mailing list
>>>> > OSPF@ietf.org
>>>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
- [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (3644) RFC Errata System
- Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (3… Acee Lindem
- Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (3… Preet DSouza
- Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (3… Preet DSouza
- Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (3… Preet DSouza
- Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (3… Acee Lindem
- Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (3… Preet DSouza