RFC Errata
RFC 4873, "GMPLS Segment Recovery", May 2007
Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 9270
Source of RFC: ccamp (rtg)
Errata ID: 941
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2007-05-08
Held for Document Update by: Adrian Farrel
Date Held: 2010-10-30
Section 5.1 says:
The format of a SECONDARY_RECORD_ROUTE object is the same as a RECORD_ROUTE object, Class number 21. This includes the definition of subobjects defined for RECORD_ROUTE object. The class of the SECONDARY_RECORD_ROUTE object is 201 (of the form 11bbbbbb).
It should say:
The format of a SECONDARY_RECORD_ROUTE object is the same as that of a RECORD_ROUTE object, Class number 21. This includes the definition of subobjects defined for the RECORD_ROUTE object. The class of the SECONDARY_RECORD_ROUTE object is 201 (of the form 11bbbbbb).
Notes:
The proposed text change (below) is rejected in favor of more correct English.
The format of a SECONDARY_RECORD_ROUTE object is the same as for a
RECORD_ROUTE object, Class number 21. This includes the definition
of subobjects defined for the RECORD_ROUTE object. The class of the
SECONDARY_RECORD_ROUTE object is 201 (of the form 11bbbbbb).