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

Rebecca VanRheenen <rvanrheenen@amsl.com> Mon, 22 January 2024 18:21 UTC

Return-Path: <rvanrheenen@amsl.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 105B8C15155C for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:21:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.207
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.207 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pvFsJqq-y-OP for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:21:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from c8a.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83671C151549 for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:21:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69A83424CD3E; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:21:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 57Jr9-4yTILs; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:21:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2601:641:300:5fb0:cd86:c1b1:9cad:2ae9] (unknown [IPv6:2601:641:300:5fb0:cd86:c1b1:9cad:2ae9]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 36579424B455; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:21:18 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Rebecca VanRheenen <rvanrheenen@amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240122122627.193701939BC6@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:21:16 -0800
Cc: dominique.barthel@orange.com, gnawali@cs.uh.edu, pal@cs.stanford.edu, roll@ietf.org, RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5D65DCF6-60F3-4D74-9520-C0FCD1DF3CD5@amsl.com>
References: <20240122122627.193701939BC6@rfcpa.amsl.com>
To: John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/xGFaYYF3igTsRJNX6kq14uAT3F8>
Subject: Re: [Roll] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6719 (7773)
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/roll/>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:21:19 -0000

Hi John,

We are unable to verify this erratum that the submitter marked as editorial, so we changed the Type to “Technical”. As Stream Approver, please review and set the Status and Type accordingly (see the definitions at https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata-definitions/).

You may review the report at: 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7773

Information on how to verify errata reports can be found at: 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/how-to-verify/

Further information on errata can be found at: 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.php

Thank you,

RFC Editor/rv

> On Jan 22, 2024, at 4:26 AM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> 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://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7773
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Dominique Barthel <dominique.barthel@orange.com>
> 
> 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
>