From lberger@labn.net Tue Aug 7 04:42:56 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l1vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l1vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3009C21F86FC for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 04:42:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -97.722 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-97.722 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.839, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RDNS_NONE=0.1, 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 UsklJRUeS6p5 for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 04:42:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oproxy12-pub.bluehost.com (unknown [IPv6:2605:dc00:100:2::a4]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F2BCB21F864A for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 04:42:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 28792 invoked by uid 0); 7 Aug 2012 11:42:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by oproxy12.bluehost.com with SMTP; 7 Aug 2012 11:42:54 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=YolX0FVeUn/kMbUmlq+UabBpdFr1Tp70Gu3uup7sVLo=; b=yAZZx6gvUzDb3CUMTSV4R9mHfv7k4XjmtyKnRoBGFF/e9cy0GASHoZeMe12yl6SZx1gAHNrDDgOJDckJBFOPuJVAr+25ACVShzXunbZLXbIMLORjYsPYmELR+oIgGjHy; Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]:58640 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SyiBZ-0007Zz-RN; Tue, 07 Aug 2012 05:42:54 -0600 Message-ID: <5020FF3C.1060106@labn.net> Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 07:42:52 -0400 From: Lou Berger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: RFC Errata System References: <20120807112425.D2E90B1E002@rfc-editor.org> In-Reply-To: <20120807112425.D2E90B1E002@rfc-editor.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net} Cc: l1vpn@ietf.org, kmichiel@cisco.com, stbryant@cisco.com Subject: Re: [L1vpn] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5252 (3310) X-BeenThere: l1vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Layer 1 Virtual Private Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 11:42:56 -0000 This looks like a valid editorial Errata to me (Section reference 3.2 --> 2.2.) Lou (co-author) On 8/7/2012 7:24 AM, RFC Errata System wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5252, > "OSPF-Based Layer 1 VPN Auto-Discovery". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5252&eid=3310 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Editorial > Reported by: Kris Michielsen > > Section: 2.1 > > Original Text > ------------- > L1VPN Info TLV > > A single TLV, as defined in Section 3.2, MUST be present. If more > > than one L1VPN Info TLV is present, only the first TLV is > > processed and the others MUST be ignored on receipt. > > > > > > Corrected Text > -------------- > L1VPN Info TLV > > A single TLV, as defined in Section 2.2, MUST be present. If more > > than one L1VPN Info TLV is present, only the first TLV is > > processed and the others MUST be ignored on receipt. > > > > > > Notes > ----- > > > 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. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC5252 (draft-ietf-l1vpn-ospf-auto-discovery-06) > -------------------------------------- > Title : OSPF-Based Layer 1 VPN Auto-Discovery > Publication Date : July 2008 > Author(s) : I. Bryskin, L. Berger > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Layer 1 Virtual Private Networks > Area : Routing > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > > > > From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Tue Aug 7 04:25:24 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l1vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l1vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E63C721F8622 for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 04:25:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.986 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.986 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.014, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, 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 Q89P1KK7iIFZ for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 04:25:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80CB621F850B for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 04:25:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id D2E90B1E002; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 04:24:25 -0700 (PDT) To: ibryskin@advaoptical.com, lberger@labn.net, stbryant@cisco.com, adrian@olddog.co.uk, adrian@olddog.co.uk, hbrahim@nortel.com, takeda.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20120807112425.D2E90B1E002@rfc-editor.org> Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 04:24:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 08:12:23 -0700 Cc: kmichiel@cisco.com, l1vpn@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [L1vpn] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5252 (3310) X-BeenThere: l1vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Layer 1 Virtual Private Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 11:25:25 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5252, "OSPF-Based Layer 1 VPN Auto-Discovery". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5252&eid=3310 -------------------------------------- Type: Editorial Reported by: Kris Michielsen Section: 2.1 Original Text ------------- L1VPN Info TLV A single TLV, as defined in Section 3.2, MUST be present. If more than one L1VPN Info TLV is present, only the first TLV is processed and the others MUST be ignored on receipt. Corrected Text -------------- L1VPN Info TLV A single TLV, as defined in Section 2.2, MUST be present. If more than one L1VPN Info TLV is present, only the first TLV is processed and the others MUST be ignored on receipt. Notes ----- 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. -------------------------------------- RFC5252 (draft-ietf-l1vpn-ospf-auto-discovery-06) -------------------------------------- Title : OSPF-Based Layer 1 VPN Auto-Discovery Publication Date : July 2008 Author(s) : I. Bryskin, L. Berger Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Layer 1 Virtual Private Networks Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG