From stbryant@cisco.com Thu Sep 1 00:14:12 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B146121F874B for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2011 00:14:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.242 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.242 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.243, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_22=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, 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 t+LJ388mv2uU for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2011 00:14:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-2.cisco.com (ams-iport-2.cisco.com [144.254.224.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0CF221F8AEC for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2011 00:14:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=stbryant@cisco.com; l=4166; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1314861343; x=1316070943; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VQEHh+pRUAoMlCSpxinNFWr6F8wHx1DtQ4VS+DI0kjw=; b=TydKs7vwyNI7SHoAZq7awtaRA6EYvJXrh+q0iKYoACOcDj5AaZjc8wnI Hthe9HsgzZixK6m4fZMt3PKy1fv+G8VL6Ij9XoAVWT1MhbHuRKPibdfkw XWC3d3zW/q/+aIOLJpDcBNDcieEcTUeK945ZhSNZ8txuAO91McjWmtGX5 c=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,312,1312156800"; d="scan'208";a="52803463" Received: from ams-core-4.cisco.com ([144.254.72.77]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Sep 2011 07:15:37 +0000 Received: from cisco.com (mrwint.cisco.com [64.103.70.36]) by ams-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p817FbTn022677; Thu, 1 Sep 2011 07:15:37 GMT Received: from stbryant-mac2.local (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id p817FWGk026566; Thu, 1 Sep 2011 08:15:34 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4E5F3114.3030404@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 08:15:32 +0100 From: Stewart Bryant User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:6.0.1) Gecko/20110830 Thunderbird/6.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Joel W. Gannett" References: <20110831192017.BFB5F98C250@rfc-editor.org> <3B21DFA2-9EB6-49A7-8DB8-D4A4B242133A@ericsson.com> <4E5E95FB.8080408@research.telcordia.com> In-Reply-To: <4E5E95FB.8080408@research.telcordia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "jmoy@casc.com" , "ospf@ietf.org" , RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (2951) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 07:14:12 -0000 If you can't I can. Please let me have the right text so I can cut and paste it in. Thanks Stewart On 31/08/2011 21:13, Joel W. Gannett wrote: > Acee, > > OK, that makes things consistent, too. And I guess yours is the > correct way to do it. Thanks for the prompt feedback! > > I am happy to edit the errata to reflect your correction, but do I > have permission to edit it? I've never done this before, so I don't > know what the procedures are. > > (Or, does one submit an errata for an errata?) > > Joel Gannett > > On 8/31/2011 3:58 PM, Acee Lindem wrote: >> Hi Joel, >> There is a problem but actually it is R4's cost to N8 that is wrong >> in Table 6. It should be 25 rather than 18. Can this errata be edited? >> Thanks, >> Acee >> >> On Aug 31, 2011, at 3:20 PM, RFC Errata System wrote: >> >>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2328, >>> "OSPF Version 2". >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> You may review the report below and at: >>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=2328&eid=2951 >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Type: Technical >>> Reported by: Joel Gannett >>> >>> Section: 3.4 >>> >>> Original Text >>> ------------- >>> Destination RT3 adv. RT4 adv. >>> _________________________________ >>> Ia,Ib 20 27 >>> N6 16 15 >>> N7 20 19 >>> N8 18 18 >>> N9-N11,H1 29 36 >>> _________________________________ >>> RT5 14 8 >>> RT7 20 14 >>> >>> Table 6: Destinations advertised into Area 1 >>> by Routers RT3 and RT4. >>> >>> Corrected Text >>> -------------- >>> Destination RT3 adv. RT4 adv. >>> _________________________________ >>> Ia,Ib 20 27 >>> N6 16 15 >>> N7 20 19 >>> N8 18 18 >>> N9-N11,H1 29 29 >>> _________________________________ >>> RT5 14 8 >>> RT7 20 14 >>> >>> Table 6: Destinations advertised into Area 1 >>> by Routers RT3 and RT4. >>> >>> Notes >>> ----- >>> The distance from RT4 to N9-N11,H1 should be changed from 36 to 29 >>> to be consistent with the row above that, which shows the distance >>> from RT3 to N8 and RT4 to N8 as the same value, 18. The length 18 >>> path from RT3 to N8 is RT3-RT6-RT10-N8, while the length 18 path >>> from RT4 to N8 is RT4-RT5-RT7-RT10-N8. The summarized N9-N11,H1 >>> network is a distance 11 beyond that, or 29 in both cases. The >>> length 29 path from RT3 to N9-N11,H1 is >>> RT3-RT6-RT10-RT11-(N9-N11,H1), and the length 29 path from RT4 to >>> N9-N11,H1 is RT4-RT5-RT7-RT10-RT11-(N9-N11,H1). >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> RFC2328 (no draft string recorded) >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Title : OSPF Version 2 >>> Publication Date : April 1998 >>> Author(s) : J. Moy >>> Category : STANDARD >>> Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP >>> Area : Routing >>> Stream : IETF >>> Verifying Party : IESG > -- For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html From jgannett@research.telcordia.com Thu Sep 1 05:09:09 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B2CF21F909E for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2011 05:09:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.169 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.169 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.170, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_22=0.6] 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 Wk1GewKnSaEI for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2011 05:09:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from flower.research.telcordia.com (flower.research.telcordia.com [128.96.41.5]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6466821F9079 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2011 05:09:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (vpntnlB207.research.telcordia.com [128.96.59.207]) by flower.research.telcordia.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id p81CATM6024275; Thu, 1 Sep 2011 08:10:34 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4E5F7633.5050904@research.telcordia.com> Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 08:10:27 -0400 From: "Joel W. Gannett" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: stbryant@cisco.com References: <20110831192017.BFB5F98C250@rfc-editor.org> <3B21DFA2-9EB6-49A7-8DB8-D4A4B242133A@ericsson.com> <4E5E95FB.8080408@research.telcordia.com> <4E5F3114.3030404@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <4E5F3114.3030404@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "jmoy@casc.com" , "ospf@ietf.org" , RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (2951) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 12:09:09 -0000 I posted a new errata incorporating the version of the fix that Acee suggested. So all that needs to be done is to reject my original posting on this topic. (Is there a mechanism for rejecting and/or deleting reported errata?) On 9/1/2011 3:15 AM, Stewart Bryant wrote: > If you can't I can. > > Please let me have the right text so I can cut and paste it in. > > Thanks > > Stewart > > On 31/08/2011 21:13, Joel W. Gannett wrote: >> Acee, >> >> OK, that makes things consistent, too. And I guess yours is the >> correct way to do it. Thanks for the prompt feedback! >> >> I am happy to edit the errata to reflect your correction, but do I >> have permission to edit it? I've never done this before, so I don't >> know what the procedures are. >> >> (Or, does one submit an errata for an errata?) >> >> Joel Gannett >> >> On 8/31/2011 3:58 PM, Acee Lindem wrote: >>> Hi Joel, >>> There is a problem but actually it is R4's cost to N8 that is wrong >>> in Table 6. It should be 25 rather than 18. Can this errata be edited? >>> Thanks, >>> Acee >>> >>> On Aug 31, 2011, at 3:20 PM, RFC Errata System wrote: >>> >>>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2328, >>>> "OSPF Version 2". >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------- >>>> You may review the report below and at: >>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=2328&eid=2951 >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------- >>>> Type: Technical >>>> Reported by: Joel Gannett >>>> >>>> Section: 3.4 >>>> >>>> Original Text >>>> ------------- >>>> Destination RT3 adv. RT4 adv. >>>> _________________________________ >>>> Ia,Ib 20 27 >>>> N6 16 15 >>>> N7 20 19 >>>> N8 18 18 >>>> N9-N11,H1 29 36 >>>> _________________________________ >>>> RT5 14 8 >>>> RT7 20 14 >>>> >>>> Table 6: Destinations advertised into Area 1 >>>> by Routers RT3 and RT4. >>>> >>>> Corrected Text >>>> -------------- >>>> Destination RT3 adv. RT4 adv. >>>> _________________________________ >>>> Ia,Ib 20 27 >>>> N6 16 15 >>>> N7 20 19 >>>> N8 18 18 >>>> N9-N11,H1 29 29 >>>> _________________________________ >>>> RT5 14 8 >>>> RT7 20 14 >>>> >>>> Table 6: Destinations advertised into Area 1 >>>> by Routers RT3 and RT4. >>>> >>>> Notes >>>> ----- >>>> The distance from RT4 to N9-N11,H1 should be changed from 36 to 29 >>>> to be consistent with the row above that, which shows the distance >>>> from RT3 to N8 and RT4 to N8 as the same value, 18. The length 18 >>>> path from RT3 to N8 is RT3-RT6-RT10-N8, while the length 18 path >>>> from RT4 to N8 is RT4-RT5-RT7-RT10-N8. The summarized N9-N11,H1 >>>> network is a distance 11 beyond that, or 29 in both cases. The >>>> length 29 path from RT3 to N9-N11,H1 is >>>> RT3-RT6-RT10-RT11-(N9-N11,H1), and the length 29 path from RT4 to >>>> N9-N11,H1 is RT4-RT5-RT7-RT10-RT11-(N9-N11,H1). >>>> >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------- >>>> RFC2328 (no draft string recorded) >>>> -------------------------------------- >>>> Title : OSPF Version 2 >>>> Publication Date : April 1998 >>>> Author(s) : J. Moy >>>> Category : STANDARD >>>> Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP >>>> Area : Routing >>>> Stream : IETF >>>> Verifying Party : IESG >> > > -- Joel W. Gannett, PhD, Senior Scientist Telcordia Technologies Applied Research Area One Telcordia Drive, Room RRC 1G-306 Piscataway, NJ 08854-4151 voice (732) 699-2693 email jgannett@research.telcordia.com web http://www.research.telcordia.com/bios/jgannett FAX (732) 336-7015 From acee.lindem@ericsson.com Tue Sep 20 10:37:46 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1A9711E80BE for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 10:37:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 ot4GBA-a3QhW for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 10:37:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08BCF11E80E8 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 10:37:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8KHe8pw000900 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 12:40:12 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.60]) by eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) with mapi; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 13:40:07 -0400 From: Acee Lindem To: OSPF List Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 13:40:05 -0400 Thread-Topic: WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt Thread-Index: Acx3vFaQ5K+AdD4EQx2kj01urz/6kA== Message-ID: <9FB813BB-CDEB-4592-8574-0C9D28140E3A@ericsson.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:37:46 -0000 All, This is start a two-week working group last call on draft-ietf-ospf-multi-i= nstance-04.txt This working group last call ends Oct. 4th. Please send your comments to th= e OSPF WG mailing list. We discussed last calling this document at IETF 81. While not necessarily a= requirement, there is also an implementation.=20 Here is a URL for your convenience: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt Thanks, Acee and Abhay= From pauwells@cisco.com Tue Sep 20 11:24:40 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 872641F0C5C for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:24:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 XEoUO8d17q+a for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtv-iport-4.cisco.com (mtv-iport-4.cisco.com [173.36.130.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0288F1F0C57 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:24:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=pauwells@cisco.com; l=842; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1316543226; x=1317752826; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Rwd5Czk7wetniGxCRoIbTtpffJb2absAGd7jDFGEYtk=; b=BOQ5M9q86JeZil+5WGbZa0b0tK8RTKot8sapgerihKzBDGSk++XzhAXp PSsdi9E9M6v1UtQS7V3zbipa8I1m3v0WLdQYjgDhBJWgvReYZCI8DeExV dIGsGKhkX+ptgSEMaeqskLz2cFox21RKqaTOdDDZxjIFTOnawzFHMEkVS o=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,412,1312156800"; d="scan'208";a="3240316" Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by mtv-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Sep 2011 18:27:06 +0000 Received: from pauwells-linux.cisco.com (sjc-pauwells-8914.cisco.com [10.20.194.117]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p8KIR6Jb000753; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:27:06 GMT Message-ID: <4E78DAF9.9050603@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 13:27:05 -0500 From: Paul Wells User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.22) Gecko/20110906 Fedora/3.1.14-1.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.14 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Acee Lindem References: <9FB813BB-CDEB-4592-8574-0C9D28140E3A@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <9FB813BB-CDEB-4592-8574-0C9D28140E3A@ericsson.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: OSPF List Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:24:40 -0000 Hi Acee, I think that the last two paragraphs in section 7, "IANA Considerations," should be removed to be consistent with the current text in section 5. Regards, Paul On 09/20/2011 12:40 PM, Acee Lindem wrote: > All, > > This is start a two-week working group last call on draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt > > This working group last call ends Oct. 4th. Please send your comments to the OSPF WG mailing list. > > We discussed last calling this document at IETF 81. While not necessarily a requirement, there is also an implementation. > > Here is a URL for your convenience: > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt > > Thanks, > > Acee and Abhay > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf From vladica.stanisic@ericsson.com Tue Sep 20 11:47:21 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1DFB1F0C57 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:47:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 RX44D2xWAaGc for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:47:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F30111F0C3B for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:47:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8KInjFd018828 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 13:49:47 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.60]) by eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) with mapi; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:49:43 -0400 From: Vladica Stanisic To: Acee Lindem , OSPF List Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:49:42 -0400 Thread-Topic: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt Thread-Index: Acx3vFaQ5K+AdD4EQx2kj01urz/6kAAB6vRA Message-ID: References: <9FB813BB-CDEB-4592-8574-0C9D28140E3A@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <9FB813BB-CDEB-4592-8574-0C9D28140E3A@ericsson.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:47:21 -0000 Hi Acee, Section 3 OSPF Interface Instance ID Sentences The OSPF Interface ID will be added to this structure. The Interface Instance ID will default to 0.=20 Should this be The OSPF Interface Instance ID will be added to this structure. The OSPF Interface Instance ID will default to 0. In order to be consistent with section name? Section 5. Backward Compatibility and Deployment Considerations What about ospf trap ospfConfigErrorType. One of the values is authTypeMism= atch. Would there be a large number of generated traps then? There should b= e some note about traps as well. Regards Vladica -----Original Message----- From: ospf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ace= e Lindem Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 1:40 PM To: OSPF List Subject: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-iet= f-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt All, This is start a two-week working group last call on draft-ietf-ospf-multi-i= nstance-04.txt This working group last call ends Oct. 4th. Please send your comments to th= e OSPF WG mailing list. We discussed last calling this document at IETF 81. While not necessarily a= requirement, there is also an implementation.=20 Here is a URL for your convenience: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt Thanks, Acee and Abhay _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list OSPF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf From vladica.stanisic@ericsson.com Tue Sep 20 11:49:04 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49FDD1F0C78 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:49:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 wYDiZseVKivx for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:49:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CB631F0C74 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:49:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8KIpD8U019229 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 13:51:29 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.60]) by eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) with mapi; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:51:13 -0400 From: Vladica Stanisic To: Acee Lindem , OSPF List Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:51:12 -0400 Thread-Topic: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt Thread-Index: Acx3vFaQ5K+AdD4EQx2kj01urz/6kAAB6vRAAACN0TA= Message-ID: References: <9FB813BB-CDEB-4592-8574-0C9D28140E3A@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:49:04 -0000 Correction trap name is ospfIfAuthFailure Vladica -----Original Message----- From: ospf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Vla= dica Stanisic Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 2:50 PM To: Acee Lindem; OSPF List Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft= -ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt Hi Acee, Section 3 OSPF Interface Instance ID Sentences The OSPF Interface ID will be added to this structure. The Interface Instance ID will default to 0.=20 Should this be The OSPF Interface Instance ID will be added to this structure. The OSPF Interface Instance ID will default to 0. In order to be consistent with section name? Section 5. Backward Compatibility and Deployment Considerations What about ospf trap ospfConfigErrorType. One of the values is authTypeMism= atch. Would there be a large number of generated traps then? There should b= e some note about traps as well. Regards Vladica -----Original Message----- From: ospf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ace= e Lindem Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 1:40 PM To: OSPF List Subject: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-iet= f-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt All, This is start a two-week working group last call on draft-ietf-ospf-multi-i= nstance-04.txt This working group last call ends Oct. 4th. Please send your comments to th= e OSPF WG mailing list. We discussed last calling this document at IETF 81. While not necessarily a= requirement, there is also an implementation.=20 Here is a URL for your convenience: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt Thanks, Acee and Abhay _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list OSPF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list OSPF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf From acee.lindem@ericsson.com Tue Sep 20 14:44:22 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D7E71F0C91 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:44:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.535 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.535 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.064, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 Ewu6xfEQqNR1 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:44:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr3.ericy.com (imr3.ericy.com [198.24.6.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FBE61F0C67 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:44:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) by imr3.ericy.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p8KLklND025216 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:46:48 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.60]) by eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) with mapi; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:46:47 -0400 From: Acee Lindem To: Paul Wells Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:46:45 -0400 Thread-Topic: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt Thread-Index: Acx33st99GC8nFYzQL+yqGE9itiW7w== Message-ID: References: <9FB813BB-CDEB-4592-8574-0C9D28140E3A@ericsson.com> <4E78DAF9.9050603@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <4E78DAF9.9050603@cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: OSPF List Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 21:44:22 -0000 Hi Paul, Agreed - will remove in 05. =20 Thanks,=20 Acee On Sep 20, 2011, at 2:27 PM, Paul Wells wrote: > Hi Acee, >=20 > I think that the last two paragraphs in section 7, "IANA=20 > Considerations," should be removed to be consistent with the=20 > current text in section 5. >=20 > Regards, > Paul >=20 > On 09/20/2011 12:40 PM, Acee Lindem wrote: >> All, >>=20 >> This is start a two-week working group last call on draft-ietf-ospf-mult= i-instance-04.txt >>=20 >> This working group last call ends Oct. 4th. Please send your comments to= the OSPF WG mailing list. >>=20 >> We discussed last calling this document at IETF 81. While not necessaril= y a requirement, there is also an implementation. >>=20 >> Here is a URL for your convenience: >>=20 >> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt >>=20 >> Thanks, >>=20 >> Acee and Abhay >> _______________________________________________ >> OSPF mailing list >> OSPF@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf From acee.lindem@ericsson.com Tue Sep 20 14:48:37 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A50E81F0C67 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:48:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.538 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.538 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.061, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 bsVKx1WSN-nf for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:48:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F24E71F0C87 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:48:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8KLlM0m025594 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:48:09 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.60]) by eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) with mapi; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:47:56 -0400 From: Acee Lindem To: Vladica Stanisic Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:47:55 -0400 Thread-Topic: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt Thread-Index: Acx33vVGHUZ6B525RjqlpvBBXvmTjQ== Message-ID: <52DB37F3-F482-4D52-9623-557FE6CB14C4@ericsson.com> References: <9FB813BB-CDEB-4592-8574-0C9D28140E3A@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: OSPF List Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 21:48:37 -0000 Hi Vladica, On Sep 20, 2011, at 2:49 PM, Vladica Stanisic wrote: > Hi Acee, >=20 > Section 3 OSPF Interface Instance ID >=20 > Sentences >=20 > The OSPF Interface ID will be added to this structure. > The Interface Instance ID will default to 0.=20 >=20 > Should this be >=20 > The OSPF Interface Instance ID will be added to this structure. > The OSPF Interface Instance ID will default to 0. >=20 > In order to be consistent with section name? Agreed - will update in the 05 version.=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > Section 5. Backward Compatibility and Deployment Considerations >=20 > What about ospf trap ospfConfigErrorType. One of the values is authTypeMi= smatch. Would there be a large number of generated traps then? There should= be some note about traps as well. That's a good point. I will address this issue.=20 Thanks, Acee >=20 >=20 > Regards > Vladica >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: ospf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of A= cee Lindem > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 1:40 PM > To: OSPF List > Subject: [OSPF] WG Last Call for OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions - draft-i= etf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt >=20 > All, >=20 > This is start a two-week working group last call on draft-ietf-ospf-multi= -instance-04.txt >=20 > This working group last call ends Oct. 4th. Please send your comments to = the OSPF WG mailing list. >=20 > We discussed last calling this document at IETF 81. While not necessarily= a requirement, there is also an implementation.=20 >=20 > Here is a URL for your convenience: >=20 > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-04.txt >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Acee and Abhay > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf From acee.lindem@ericsson.com Wed Sep 21 13:53:43 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 433CE5E8002 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:53:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.543 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.543 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.056, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 2htbcBeMLFM8 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:53:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A606411E80A0 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8LKu4KQ021653 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:56:09 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.60]) by eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) with mapi; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:56:05 -0400 From: Acee Lindem To: OSPF List Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:56:03 -0400 Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-05.txt Thread-Index: Acx4oOCpgg6G1CRORyyP+Y1IwLz0jg== Message-ID: <73906447-A474-49D1-9D3F-37694F9C621B@ericsson.com> References: <20110921012222.29825.13586.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OSPF] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-05.txt X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 20:53:43 -0000 All, This version addresses Vladica's and Paul's comments as well as specifying = the details for IANA OSPF Instance ID allocation. Please base your OSPF WG = last call review on this version. Thanks, Acee Begin forwarded message: From: "internet-drafts@ietf.org" > Date: September 20, 2011 9:22:22 PM EDT To: Acee Lindem > Cc: Acee Lindem >= , "sina@cisco.com" >, "akr@cisco.com" > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-05.txt A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance-05.txt has been succes= sfully submitted by Acee Lindem and posted to the IETF repository. Filename: draft-ietf-ospf-multi-instance Revision: 05 Title: OSPF Multi-Instance Extensions Creation date: 2011-09-20 WG ID: ospf Number of pages: 13 Abstract: OSPFv3 includes a mechanism for supporting multiple instances on the same link. OSPFv2 could benefit from such a mechanism in order to support multiple routing domains on the same subnet. The OSPFv2 instance ID is reserved for support of separate OSPFv2 protocol instances. This is different from OSPFv3 where it could be used for other purposes such as putting the same link in multiple areas. OSPFv2 supports this capability using a separate subnet or the OSPF multi-area adjacency capability. The IETF Secretariat From acee.lindem@ericsson.com Wed Sep 21 14:16:40 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1840B11E8157 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:16:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.545 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.545 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.054, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 9FSVbvjuI+cH for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:16:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr3.ericy.com (imr3.ericy.com [198.24.6.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AA6A11E80BA for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:16:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) by imr3.ericy.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p8LLJ8RA003576 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:19:08 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.60]) by eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) with mapi; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 17:19:08 -0400 From: Acee Lindem To: OSPF List Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 17:19:06 -0400 Thread-Topic: IETF 82 in Taipei Thread-Index: Acx4pBi84PSoHKPETNi7y7nxdlNGbA== Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OSPF] IETF 82 in Taipei X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:16:40 -0000 At the last OSPF WG meeting in Quebec City, we indicated that we may not me= et in Taipei. Since then, there has not been many new drafts or list discus= sion. Consequently, we are not planning on having a F2F meeting in Taipei. = We will definitely meet in Paris in March. If you have any concerns, please= contact Abhay and myself.=20 Thanks,=20 Acee and Abhay = From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Wed Sep 28 07:31:14 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFAC821F8D05 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:31:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.478 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.478 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.122, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 qJoS5Uf7zsg0 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:31:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 615A421F8C9C for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:31:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id C54F198C260; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:34:01 -0700 (PDT) To: lberger@labn.net, ibryskin@advaoptical.com, alex.zinin@alcatel-lucent.com, none@rfc-editor.org, stbryant@cisco.com, adrian@olddog.co.uk, acee.lindem@ericsson.com, akr@cisco.com From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20110928143401.C54F198C260@rfc-editor.org> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:34:01 -0700 (PDT) Cc: gcote@awardsolutions.com, ospf@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2981) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 14:31:14 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5250, "The OSPF Opaque LSA Option". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5250&eid=2981 -------------------------------------- Type: Editorial Reported by: Gary Cote Section: 3 Original Text ------------- Section 7 describes Opaque type allocation and assignment. Corrected Text -------------- Section 9 describes Opaque type allocation and assignment. Notes ----- Section 7 was the "IANA Considerations" section in the previous RFC, 2370. IANA Considerations are included in Section 9 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. -------------------------------------- RFC5250 (draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-05) -------------------------------------- Title : The OSPF Opaque LSA Option Publication Date : July 2008 Author(s) : L. Berger, I. Bryskin, A. Zinin, R. Coltun Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Wed Sep 28 07:32:34 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F88C21F8D05 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:32:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.479 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.479 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.121, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 lyFykNGvVTu4 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:32:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3452A21F8CD9 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:32:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id E992D98C260; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:35:22 -0700 (PDT) To: lberger@labn.net, ibryskin@advaoptical.com, alex.zinin@alcatel-lucent.com, none@rfc-editor.org, stbryant@cisco.com, adrian@olddog.co.uk, acee.lindem@ericsson.com, akr@cisco.com From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20110928143522.E992D98C260@rfc-editor.org> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:35:22 -0700 (PDT) Cc: gcote@awardsolutions.com, ospf@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2982) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 14:32:34 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5250, "The OSPF Opaque LSA Option". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5250&eid=2982 -------------------------------------- Type: Editorial Reported by: Gary Cote Section: A.2 Original Text ------------- See section 7 of this document for a description of Opaque type allocation and assignment. Corrected Text -------------- See section 9 of this document for a description of Opaque type allocation and assignment. Notes ----- Section 7 was the "IANA Considerations" section in the previous RFC, 2370. IANA Considerations are included in Section 9 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. -------------------------------------- RFC5250 (draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-05) -------------------------------------- Title : The OSPF Opaque LSA Option Publication Date : July 2008 Author(s) : L. Berger, I. Bryskin, A. Zinin, R. Coltun Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From acee.lindem@ericsson.com Wed Sep 28 08:34:40 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9AC811E8091 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:34:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.051, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 lK0i6cPmpeH6 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:34:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA46C11E8095 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:34:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8SFbEri019245; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 10:37:15 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.60]) by eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) with mapi; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:37:08 -0400 From: Acee Lindem To: RFC Errata System Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:37:06 -0400 Thread-Topic: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2981) Thread-Index: Acx99Hrpzw6LO6XxRWmkf+Tv9AsjIw== Message-ID: <48B7CFFE-2B7E-4997-B94A-0520468B8BE3@ericsson.com> References: <20110928143401.C54F198C260@rfc-editor.org> In-Reply-To: <20110928143401.C54F198C260@rfc-editor.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "alex.zinin@alcatel-lucent.com" , "gcote@awardsolutions.com" , "ospf@ietf.org" , "none@rfc-editor.org" Subject: Re: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2981) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:34:40 -0000 Steward, Adrian,=20 Approved for state change to verified. This is something I'm going to add t= o my list of things to check (especially in Bis documents).=20 Thanks, Acee=20 On Sep 28, 2011, at 10:34 AM, RFC Errata System wrote: >=20 > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5250, > "The OSPF Opaque LSA Option". >=20 > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D5250&eid=3D2981 >=20 > -------------------------------------- > Type: Editorial > Reported by: Gary Cote >=20 > Section: 3 >=20 > Original Text > ------------- > Section 7 describes Opaque type allocation and assignment. >=20 > Corrected Text > -------------- > Section 9 describes Opaque type allocation and assignment. >=20 > Notes > ----- > Section 7 was the "IANA Considerations" section in the previous RFC, 2370= . > IANA Considerations are included in Section 9 of this document. >=20 > 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.=20 >=20 > -------------------------------------- > RFC5250 (draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-05) > -------------------------------------- > Title : The OSPF Opaque LSA Option > Publication Date : July 2008 > Author(s) : L. Berger, I. Bryskin, A. Zinin, R. Coltun > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP > Area : Routing > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG From acee.lindem@ericsson.com Wed Sep 28 08:35:13 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26EC11F0C6B for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:35:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.049, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 kOj2EPIBGNq0 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:35:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82C591F0C69 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:35:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8SFbgrx019397; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 10:37:56 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.60]) by eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) with mapi; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:37:52 -0400 From: Acee Lindem To: RFC Errata System Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:37:51 -0400 Thread-Topic: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2982) Thread-Index: Acx99JUuWxzWNzIlTcqEVgHe5UaN7w== Message-ID: References: <20110928143522.E992D98C260@rfc-editor.org> In-Reply-To: <20110928143522.E992D98C260@rfc-editor.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "alex.zinin@alcatel-lucent.com" , "gcote@awardsolutions.com" , "ospf@ietf.org" , "none@rfc-editor.org" Subject: Re: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2982) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:35:13 -0000 Stewart, Adrian,=20 Approved for state change to verified.=20 Thanks, Acee=20 On Sep 28, 2011, at 10:35 AM, RFC Errata System wrote: >=20 > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5250, > "The OSPF Opaque LSA Option". >=20 > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D5250&eid=3D2982 >=20 > -------------------------------------- > Type: Editorial > Reported by: Gary Cote >=20 > Section: A.2 >=20 > Original Text > ------------- > See section 7 of this document for a description of Opaque type allocatio= n and assignment. >=20 >=20 > Corrected Text > -------------- > See section 9 of this document for a description of Opaque type allocatio= n and assignment. >=20 >=20 > Notes > ----- > Section 7 was the "IANA Considerations" section in the previous RFC, 2370= . >=20 > IANA Considerations are included in Section 9 of this document. >=20 > 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.=20 >=20 > -------------------------------------- > RFC5250 (draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-05) > -------------------------------------- > Title : The OSPF Opaque LSA Option > Publication Date : July 2008 > Author(s) : L. Berger, I. Bryskin, A. Zinin, R. Coltun > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP > Area : Routing > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG From stbryant@cisco.com Wed Sep 28 08:41:38 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F354011E80A0 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:41:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.514 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.514 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.085, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, 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 FNBUH+wOsxbv for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:41:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-2.cisco.com (ams-iport-2.cisco.com [144.254.224.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933EE11E80B0 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:41:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=stbryant@cisco.com; l=2322; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1317224665; x=1318434265; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=P6aI189c1T21a9km0gW/uX/2NyHB0Y6dQpK0SKCudYg=; b=eKo5G2Liymy45XbYGFtoPSc9kzHOvz0V6/pbMVApr5QskB7Vu3jI5SLm XTlbqndqHApUYckKTRQxilcODY9wQxuohsXfO8LFPF26GK2nfJFhGditm x8NpdvzRh7/r1Y6+9EOt0TP+ROvj886mEAgRtujUTgIXQ093M9AcE75Y8 U=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,456,1312156800"; d="scan'208";a="56597909" Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.72.81]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 28 Sep 2011 15:44:24 +0000 Received: from cisco.com (mrwint.cisco.com [64.103.70.36]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p8SFiOr9023592; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:44:24 GMT Received: from stbryant-mac2.local (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id p8SFiKWJ029272; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 16:44:21 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4E8340D4.5070406@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 16:44:20 +0100 From: Stewart Bryant User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Acee Lindem References: <20110928143401.C54F198C260@rfc-editor.org> <48B7CFFE-2B7E-4997-B94A-0520468B8BE3@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <48B7CFFE-2B7E-4997-B94A-0520468B8BE3@ericsson.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "alex.zinin@alcatel-lucent.com" , "gcote@awardsolutions.com" , "ospf@ietf.org" , "none@rfc-editor.org" , RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2981) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:41:38 -0000 Acee Do you think that anyone will be seriously confused or make an implementation error over this? This looks like an erratum that should be verified as correct (because it is), but set aside for fixing in the next release - i.e. the doc should not instruct the reader to go to the errata page to understand the doc. Stewart On 28/09/2011 16:37, Acee Lindem wrote: > Steward, Adrian, > Approved for state change to verified. This is something I'm going to add to my list of things to check (especially in Bis documents). > Thanks, > Acee > On Sep 28, 2011, at 10:34 AM, RFC Errata System wrote: > >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5250, >> "The OSPF Opaque LSA Option". >> >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5250&eid=2981 >> >> -------------------------------------- >> Type: Editorial >> Reported by: Gary Cote >> >> Section: 3 >> >> Original Text >> ------------- >> Section 7 describes Opaque type allocation and assignment. >> >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> Section 9 describes Opaque type allocation and assignment. >> >> Notes >> ----- >> Section 7 was the "IANA Considerations" section in the previous RFC, 2370. >> IANA Considerations are included in Section 9 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. >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC5250 (draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-05) >> -------------------------------------- >> Title : The OSPF Opaque LSA Option >> Publication Date : July 2008 >> Author(s) : L. Berger, I. Bryskin, A. Zinin, R. Coltun >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >> Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP >> Area : Routing >> Stream : IETF >> Verifying Party : IESG > -- For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html From acee.lindem@ericsson.com Wed Sep 28 09:01:38 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 025F021F8CA2 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:01:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.552 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.552 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.047, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 Ebd+hFEKqwrU for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:01:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5AED21F8CA0 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:01:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8SG45is026970; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:04:07 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.60]) by eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) with mapi; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:04:00 -0400 From: Acee Lindem To: "stbryant@cisco.com" Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:03:57 -0400 Thread-Topic: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2981) Thread-Index: Acx9+DugXzgSywzITIus+1M/URjVzQ== Message-ID: References: <20110928143401.C54F198C260@rfc-editor.org> <48B7CFFE-2B7E-4997-B94A-0520468B8BE3@ericsson.com> <4E8340D4.5070406@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <4E8340D4.5070406@cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "alex.zinin@alcatel-lucent.com" , "gcote@awardsolutions.com" , "ospf@ietf.org" , "none@rfc-editor.org" , RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2981) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 16:01:38 -0000 Hi Stewart,=20 On Sep 28, 2011, at 11:44 AM, Stewart Bryant wrote: > Acee >=20 > Do you think that anyone will be seriously confused > or make an implementation error over this? No.=20 >=20 > This looks like an erratum that should be verified > as correct (because it is), but set aside for fixing > in the next release - i.e. the doc should not > instruct the reader to go to the errata page to > understand the doc. Agreed. This would apply to both Errata.=20 Thanks, Acee >=20 > Stewart >=20 >=20 > On 28/09/2011 16:37, Acee Lindem wrote: >> Steward, Adrian, >> Approved for state change to verified. This is something I'm going to ad= d to my list of things to check (especially in Bis documents). >> Thanks, >> Acee >> On Sep 28, 2011, at 10:34 AM, RFC Errata System wrote: >>=20 >>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5250, >>> "The OSPF Opaque LSA Option". >>>=20 >>> -------------------------------------- >>> You may review the report below and at: >>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D5250&eid=3D2981 >>>=20 >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Type: Editorial >>> Reported by: Gary Cote >>>=20 >>> Section: 3 >>>=20 >>> Original Text >>> ------------- >>> Section 7 describes Opaque type allocation and assignment. >>>=20 >>> Corrected Text >>> -------------- >>> Section 9 describes Opaque type allocation and assignment. >>>=20 >>> Notes >>> ----- >>> Section 7 was the "IANA Considerations" section in the previous RFC, 23= 70. >>> IANA Considerations are included in Section 9 of this document. >>>=20 >>> 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. >>>=20 >>> -------------------------------------- >>> RFC5250 (draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-05) >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Title : The OSPF Opaque LSA Option >>> Publication Date : July 2008 >>> Author(s) : L. Berger, I. Bryskin, A. Zinin, R. Coltun >>> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >>> Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP >>> Area : Routing >>> Stream : IETF >>> Verifying Party : IESG >>=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > For corporate legal information go to: >=20 > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html >=20 >=20