Re: [PWE3] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5003 (3411)

[Luca Martini <[e-mail]>]

RFC Editor,

I propose to reject this Errata.
There is no technical merit in changing the example on how one might
possibly choose the 32bit number.
This is a NIT , and does not affect implementations, nor service
provider policies.
the text "Prefix = The 32-bit prefix is a value assigned by the provider
" is the main definition of how this 32 bit value is to be assigned.

Luca


Is the main point of this
On 11/15/2012 01:09 PM, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5003,
> "Attachment Individual Identifier (AII) Types for Aggregation".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5003&eid=3411
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Rajiv Asati <[e-mail]>
>
> Section: 3.2
>
> Original Text
> -------------
>
>
>      o Prefix = The 32-bit prefix is a value assigned by the provider or
>
>        it can be automatically derived from the PE's /32 IPv4 loopback
>
>        address.  Note that, for IP reachability, it is not required that
>
>        the 32-bit prefix have any association with the IPv4 address
>
>        space used in the provider's IGP or BGP.
>
>
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>
>
>      o Prefix = The 32-bit prefix is a value assigned by the provider or
>
>        it can be automatically derived from the PE's router-id i.e. LSR Id.
>
>        Note that it is not required that
>
>        the 32-bit prefix is IP routable or have any association with the 
>
>        IPv4 address space used in the provider's IGP or BGP. 
>
>
>
> Notes
> -----
> The intent of this RFC is to treat the 32bit prefix as a number that provides uniqueness in the network (within the ASN). While it can be derived from the IPv4 /32 Loopback address, it causes confusion when routers are configured with no IPv4. It is better to suggest using router-id used by LDP for calculating the LSR identifier. How is router-id calculated is outside the scope of this document.`
>
> 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. 
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC5003 (draft-ietf-pwe3-aii-aggregate-02)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Attachment Individual Identifier (AII) Types for Aggregation
> Publication Date    : September 2007
> Author(s)           : C. Metz, L. Martini, F. Balus, J. Sugimoto
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Pseudo Wire Emulation Edge to Edge INT
> Area                : Internet
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG