Re: [Roll] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6719 (7773)

[John Scudder <[e-mail]>]

ROLL Fans, RFC Authors,

The RFCEd changed the type of this erratum to Technical (I agree). I am disposed to verify it. I would verify with the first corrected text and not the “or better yet” (moving that one to the notes), because the first corrected text option represents the minimal change to make the document correct.

If there are any concerns, please let me know by Wednesday.

Thanks,

—John

> On Jan 22, 2024, at 7:26 AM, RFC Errata System <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6719,
> "The Minimum Rank with Hysteresis Objective Function".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7773__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BNgGJX1sBhJTdShI-DEaBlQBH-03cUTKCTglirEbRau1n9VPBv_NZb9a5rDmJMhss05yIKs7I25qH_7adKbzog$
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Dominique Barthel <[e-mail]>
> 
> Section: 2.2
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> If the cost of the path through the preferred parent and the worst parent is too large, a node MAY keep a smaller parent set than PARENT_SET_SIZE.
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> "If the difference in cost of the paths through the preferred parent and the worst parent is too large, a node MAY keep a smaller parent set than PARENT_SET_SIZE."
> or better yet
> "A node MAY keep a parent set smaller than PARENT_SET_SIZE, so that the difference in cost of the paths through the preferred parent and the worst parent is not too large."
> 
> Notes
> -----
> This sentence is meant to explain that there is no benefit in keeping in the parent set neighbors that have too high a path cost compared to that of the preferred parent.
> The original text omits the notion of difference in cost. It also contains a circular reference: indeed, the worst parent is the neighbor within the parent set that has the highest cost.
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is spam, it
> will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
> will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC6719 (draft-ietf-roll-minrank-hysteresis-of-11)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : The Minimum Rank with Hysteresis Objective Function
> Publication Date    : September 2012
> Author(s)           : O. Gnawali, P. Levis
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks
> Area                : Routing
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BNgGJX1sBhJTdShI-DEaBlQBH-03cUTKCTglirEbRau1n9VPBv_NZb9a5rDmJMhss05yIKs7I25qH_7gjcA-IQ$