IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Pce] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6006 (4868)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 16 November 2016 05:40 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11D4212968E for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:40:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LBZNNcEltpOv for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:40:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55CCB129687 for <pce@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:40:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 444BEB80FB1; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:40:27 -0800 (PST)
To: qzhao@huawei.com, daniel@olddog.co.uk, fabien.verhaeghe@gmail.com, takeda.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp, zali@cisco.com, julien.meuric@orange-ftgroup.com, akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, jonathan.hardwick@metaswitch.com, jpv@cisco.com, julien.meuric@orange.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20161116054027.444BEB80FB1@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:40:27 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/7vose8gzrwZlY2PsdroDVKMru4k>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 23:36:50 -0800
Cc: pce@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: [Pce] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6006 (4868)
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 05:40:48 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6006,
"Extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) for Point-to-Multipoint Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6006&eid=4868

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: DHRUV DHODY <DHRUV.IETF@GMAIL.COM>

Section: 3.5

Original Text
-------------

          <PCRep Message>::= <Common Header>
                                <response>
          <response>::=<RP>
                          [<end-point-path-pair-list>]
                          [<NO-PATH>]
                          [<attribute-list>]

        where:

           <end-point-path-pair-list>::=
                   [<END-POINTS>]<path>[<end-point-path-pair-list>]

          <path> ::= (<ERO>|<SERO>) [<path>]

          <attribute-list>::=[<OF>]
                               [<LSPA>]
                               [<BANDWIDTH>]
                               [<metric-list>]
                               [<IRO>]

Corrected Text
--------------
          <PCRep Message>::= <Common Header>
                             <response-list>

          where:

              <response-list>::=<response>[<response-list>]

              <response>::=<RP>
                         [<end-point-path-pair-list>]
                        [<NO-PATH>]
                        [<UNREACH-DESTINATION>]
                        [<attribute-list>]

              <end-point-path-pair-list>::=
                      [<END-POINTS>]<path>[<end-point-path-pair-list>]

              <path> ::= (<ERO>|<SERO>) [<path>]

          where:

              <attribute-list>::=[<OF>]
                                 [<LSPA>]
                                 [<BANDWIDTH>]
                                 [<metric-list>]
                                 [<IRO>]

Notes
-----
o Update the RBNF for Reply message format:

      * Update PCEP allows for the bundling of multiple path computation
      responses within a single Path Computation Reply (PCRep) message.

      * Update UNREACH-DESTINATION in PCRep message. This object was 
      missed in [RFC6006].

Refer: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palleti-pce-rfc6006bis/?include_text=1

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum 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  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC6006 (draft-ietf-pce-pcep-p2mp-extensions-11)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) for Point-to-Multipoint Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths
Publication Date    : September 2010
Author(s)           : Q. Zhao, Ed., D. King, Ed., F. Verhaeghe, T. Takeda, Z. Ali, J. Meuric
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Path Computation Element
Area                : Routing
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email