[Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6016 (2556)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Tue, 12 October 2010 17:49 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1F573A69DF for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.298
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.302, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fC6SF7xjMebi for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:1112:1::2f]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05C823A69F6 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 0A773E06EE; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:50:46 -0700 (PDT)
To: bsd@cisco.com, flefauch@cisco.com, ashokn@cisco.com, ietfdbh@comcast.net, lars.eggert@nokia.com, jmpolk@cisco.com, gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk
Subject: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6016 (2556)
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20101012175046.0A773E06EE@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:50:46 -0700
Cc: ah@TR-Sys.de, tsvwg@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tsvwg>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 17:49:32 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6016,
"Support for the Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) in Layer 3 VPNs".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6016&eid=2556

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Alfred Hoenes <ah@TR-Sys.de>

Section: 3.5, pg.13

Original Text
-------------
   Upon receiving a Resv message at the ingress PE (step 8 of
|  Section 2.1) with respect to data flow (i.e., PE1 in Figure 1), the
   PE determines the local VRF context and associated Path state for
   this Resv by decoding the received SESSION and FILTER_SPEC objects.
   [...]

Corrected Text
--------------
   Upon receiving a Resv message at the ingress PE (step 8 of
|  Section 2.1) with respect to the data flow (i.e., PE1 in Figure 1),
   the PE determines the local VRF context and associated Path state for
   this Resv by decoding the received SESSION and FILTER_SPEC objects.
   [...]

Notes
-----
Rationale: missing article; cf. other parts of the 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. 

--------------------------------------
RFC6016 (draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-l3vpn-07)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Support for the Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) in Layer 3 VPNs
Publication Date    : October 2010
Author(s)           : B. Davie, F. Le Faucheur, A. Narayanan
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Transport Area Working Group
Area                : Transport
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG