RFC Errata


Errata Search

 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 2 records.

Status: Verified (2)

RFC 6969, "OSPFv3 Instance ID Registry Update", July 2013

Source of RFC: ospf (rtg)

Errata ID: 3975
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT

Reported By: Peter Paluch
Date Reported: 2014-04-27
Verifier Name: Alia Atlas
Date Verified: 2014-05-07

Section 1 says:

   +---------+---------------------------------------------+-----------+
   | Value   | Description                                 | Reference |
   +---------+---------------------------------------------+-----------+
   | 0       | IPv6 unicast AF                             | [RFC5838] |
   | 1 - 31  | Base IPv6 Unicast AF dependent on local     | [RFC5838] |
   |         | policy                                      |           |
   | 32      | Base IPv6 Multicast                         | [RFC5838] |
   | 33-63   | IPv6 Multicast AFs dependent on local       | [RFC5838] |
   |         | policy                                      |           |
   | 64      | Base IPv4 Unicast AF                        | [RFC5838] |
   | 65-95   | IPv4 Unicast AFs dependent on local policy  | [RFC5838] |
   | 96      | Base IPv4 Multicast                         | [RFC5838] |
   | 97-127  | IPv4 Multicast AFs dependent on local       | [RFC5838] |
   |         | policy                                      |           |
   | 128-255 | Unassigned                                  | [RFC5838] |
   +---------+---------------------------------------------+-----------+

It should say:

   +---------+---------------------------------------------+-----------+
   | Value   | Description                                 | Reference |
   +---------+---------------------------------------------+-----------+
   | 0       | Base IPv6 Unicast AF                        | [RFC5838] |
   | 1 - 31  | IPv6 Unicast AFs dependent on local policy  | [RFC5838] |
   | 32      | Base IPv6 Multicast AF                      | [RFC5838] |
   | 33-63   | IPv6 Multicast AFs dependent on local       | [RFC5838] |
   |         | policy                                      |           |
   | 64      | Base IPv4 Unicast AF                        | [RFC5838] |
   | 65-95   | IPv4 Unicast AFs dependent on local policy  | [RFC5838] |
   | 96      | Base IPv4 Multicast                         | [RFC5838] |
   | 97-127  | IPv4 Multicast AFs dependent on local       | [RFC5838] |
   |         | policy                                      |           |
   | 128-255 | Unassigned                                  | [RFC5838] |
   +---------+---------------------------------------------+-----------+

Notes:

The term "Base" applies to Instance ID 0, not to IDs 1-31 which are additional IPv6 unicast AFs. Additionally, to keep the formatting consistent, the first letter in terms "Unicast" and "Multicast" is capitalized in each term instance. Also, in the description of values 1-31, "AF" is replaced with "AFs".

Errata ID: 3976
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT

Reported By: Peter Palúch
Date Reported: 2014-04-27
Verifier Name: Alia Atlas
Date Verified: 2014-05-07

Section 2 says:

   +--------------------------+---------------+-----------------------+
   | Value                    | Description   | Reference             |
   +--------------------------+---------------+-----------------------+
   | 128-191                  | Unassigned    | 192-255               |
   | Reserved for Private Use | this document | Private Use [RFC5226] |
   +--------------------------+---------------+-----------------------+

It should say:

   +-------------+--------------------------+-------------------------+
   | Value       | Description              | Reference               |
   +-------------+--------------------------+-------------------------+
   | 128-191     | Unassigned               |                         |
   | 192-255     | Reserved for Private Use | This Document [RFC6969] |
   +-------------+--------------------------+-------------------------+

Notes:

The table was obviously misformatted.

Report New Errata



Advanced Search