IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Pce] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5520 (3582)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Fri, 05 April 2013 08:45 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 71C7A21F9717 for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 01:45:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.353
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.353 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.247, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 Ngh5fGB0iekM for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 01:45:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03B3921F9649 for <pce@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 01:45:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 2C9EAB1E002; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 01:45:26 -0700 (PDT)
To: rbradfor@cisco.com, jpv@cisco.com, adrian@olddog.co.uk, stbryant@cisco.com, adrian@olddog.co.uk, jpv@cisco.com, julien.meuric@orange.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20130405084526.2C9EAB1E002@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 01:45:26 -0700
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 02:56:19 -0700
Cc: pce@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: [Pce] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5520 (3582)
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 08:45:43 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5520,
"Preserving Topology Confidentiality in Inter-Domain Path Computation Using a Path-Key-Based Mechanism".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5520&eid=3582

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>

Section: 3.2.3

Original Text
-------------
<request>::= <RP>
                    <segment-computation> | <path-key-expansion>

       where:
          <segment-computation> ::= <END-POINTS>
                                    [<LSPA>]
                                    [<BANDWIDTH>]
                                    [<BANDWIDTH>]
                                    [<metric-list>]
                                    [<RRO>]
                                    [<IRO>]
                                    [<LOAD-BALANCING>]
          <path-key-expansion> ::= <PATH-KEY>



Corrected Text
--------------
<request>::= <RP>
                    <segment-computation> | <path-key-expansion>

       where:
          <segment-computation> ::= <END-POINTS>
                                    [<LSPA>]
                                    [<BANDWIDTH>]
                                    [<metric-list>]
                                    [<RRO>[<BANDWIDTH>]]
                                    [<IRO>]
                                    [<LOAD-BALANCING>]
          <path-key-expansion> ::= <PATH-KEY>



Notes
-----
This document defines <path-key-expansion> to allow path request message to be used for getting the confidential path segment. The <segment-computation> should be as per RFC5440 itself. 
There is a mistake in the second BANDWIDTH object which should be placed with RRO as per RFC5440.

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. 

--------------------------------------
RFC5520 (draft-ietf-pce-path-key-05)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Preserving Topology Confidentiality in Inter-Domain Path Computation Using a Path-Key-Based Mechanism
Publication Date    : April 2009
Author(s)           : R. Bradford, Ed., JP. Vasseur, A. Farrel
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Path Computation Element
Area                : Routing
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email