RFC Errata


Errata Search
 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 5 records.

Status: Verified (2)

RFC 5496, "The Reverse Path Forwarding (RPF) Vector TLV", March 2009

Source of RFC: pim (rtg)

Errata ID: 3665
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Bharat Joshi
Date Reported: 2013-06-17
Verifier Name: Adrian Farrel
Date Verified: 2013-09-18

Section 3.1 says: 

Use of the attribute is, however, not restricted to the construction 
of source trees.  It may also be used to construct a shared tree.  In
this case, the RPF Vector TLV contains the IP address of a Rendezvous
Point (RP).

It should say:

Use of the attribute is, however, not restricted to the construction
of source trees.  It may also be used to construct a shared tree.  In
this case, the RPF Vector TLV contains the IP address of an edge 
router on the path to the Rendezvous Point (RP).

Notes:

For a source tree, as per section 3.0, RPF Vector TLV contains the IP address of edge-1 which is to be used to reach the source. Similarly, for shared tree, RPF vector TLV should contain the IP address of the edge router which is to be used to reach RP.

Errata ID: 3668
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Bharat Joshi
Date Reported: 2013-06-17
Verifier Name: Adrian Farrel
Date Verified: 2013-09-17

Section 4 says: 

4.  Vector Attribute TLV Format

   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |F|S| Type      | Length        |        Value
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-.......

   F bit
      Forward Unknown TLV.  If this bit is set, the TLV is forwarded
      regardless of whether the router understands the Type.  If the TLV
      is known, the F bit is ignored.

   S bit
      Bottom of Stack.  If this bit is set, then this is the last TLV in
      the stack.

It should say:

4.  Vector Attribute TLV Format

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |F|E| Type      | Length        |        Value
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-.......

   F-bit
      Forward Unknown TLV.  If this bit is set, the TLV is forwarded
      regardless of whether the router understands the Type.  If the TLV
      is known, the F bit is ignored.

   E-bit:
      End of Attributes.  If this bit is set, then this is the last TLV
      in the stack.

Notes:

RFC 5384 defined the Join Attribute for PIM.
RPF vector is one such Join attribute.

RFC 5384 defined the format for Join Attributes to use the F-bit and E-bit.

This change aligns the terminology with RFC 5384 and aligns the bit numbers in the figure.

There is no change to bits on the wire, procedures, or implementation details.

Status: Held for Document Update (3)

RFC 5496, "The Reverse Path Forwarding (RPF) Vector TLV", March 2009

Source of RFC: pim (rtg)

Errata ID: 3664
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Bharat Joshi
Date Reported: 2013-06-17
Held for Document Update by: Adrian Farrel
Date Held: 2013-09-17

Section 3 says: 

Without the PIM extensions specified in this document,
the core router cannot determine where the send the Join,
to the tree cannot be constructed.

It should say:

Without the PIM extensions specified in this document,
the core router cannot determine where to send the Join,
so the tree cannot be constructed.

Notes:

A small typo in "where the send the join".

Errata ID: 3666
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Bharat Joshi
Date Reported: 2013-06-17
Held for Document Update by: Adrian Farrel
Date Held: 2013-09-17

Section 3.2 says: 

The procedures in this document do not define a way for
BSR messages to be forwarded across a core in which the
BSP IP address is not routable.

It should say:

The procedures in this document do not define a way for
BSR messages to be forwarded across a core in which the
BSR IP address is not routable.

Notes:

BSP IP address is not a term used in PIM BSR. It should be BSR IP address.

Errata ID: 3667
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Bharat Joshi
Date Reported: 2013-06-17
Held for Document Update by: Adrian Farrel
Date Held: 2013-09-17

Section 3.3.1 says: 

Core 2, and subsequent core routers, will forwarding
the Join along the Vector (i.e., towards Edge 1) 
instead of trying to forward it towards S.

It should say:

Core 2, and subsequent core routers, will forward the
Join along the Vector (i.e., towards Edge 1) instead 
of trying to forward it towards S.

Notes:

A typo in "will forwarding the Join'.
(Modified resolution from original report.)

Report New Errata



Advanced Search