errata logo graphic

Found 5 records.

Status: Verified (4)

RFC2453, "RIP Version 2", November 1998

Source of RFC: ripv2 (rtg)

Errata ID: 2398

Status: Verified
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Zdenek
Date Reported: 2010-07-29
Verifier Name: Adrian Farrel
Date Verified: 2010-08-21

Section 3.4 says:

A proof is given in [2] that this algorithm ....

It should say:

A proof is given in [5] that this algorithm....

Notes:

On page 8
Correct the reference.


Errata ID: 3437

Status: Verified
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Bharat Joshi
Date Reported: 2012-12-26
Verifier Name: Adrian Farrel
Date Verified: 2013-05-06

Section 3.9.1 says:

   There is one special case.  If there is exactly
   one entry in the request, and it has an address family identifier of
   zero and a metric of infinity (i.e., 16), then this is a request to
   send the entire routing table.


It should say:

   There is one special case. If there is exactly
   one entry in the request, (in addition to any authentication entry)
   and it has an address family identifier of zero and a metric of
   infinity (i.e., 16), then this is a request to send the entire 
   routing table.

Notes:

Note that in RFC 2453 an authentication header is not considered to be an RTE.

There was obviously some confusion on this point and the additional parenthetic text clarifies that if an authentication entry is also present (as the first entry) then it is not included in the special case described in section 3.9.1.


Errata ID: 3996

Status: Verified
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Ramakrishna DTV
Date Reported: 2014-05-22
Verifier Name: Adrian Farrel
Date Verified: 2014-05-29

Section 3.4.2 says:

   Unfortunately, the question of how long convergence will take is not
   amenable to quite so simple an answer.  Before going any further, it
   will be useful to look at an example (taken from [2]).

It should say:

   Unfortunately, the question of how long convergence will take is not
   amenable to quite so simple an answer.  Before going any further, it
   will be useful to look at an example (taken from [5]).

Notes:

Correct the reference.


Errata ID: 3999

Status: Verified
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Ramakrishna DTV
Date Reported: 2014-05-25
Verifier Name: Alia Atlas
Date Verified: 2014-05-28

Section 3.4 says:

"   4.ne The method so far only has a way to lower the metric, as the
   existing metric is kept until a smaller one shows up.  It is possible
   that the initial estimate might be too low."

It should say:

"  The method so far only has a way to lower the metric, as the
   existing metric is kept until a smaller one shows up.  It is possible
   that the initial estimate might be too low."

Notes:

Spurious text "4.ne"


Status: Held for Document Update (1)

RFC2453, "RIP Version 2", November 1998

Source of RFC: ripv2 (rtg)

Errata ID: 1054

Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Nataraja Kumar Kota
Date Reported: 2007-08-27
Held for Document Update by: Adrian Farrel
Date Held: 2010-08-21

Section 3.4.4 says:

RIP implementations must also limit the rate which
of triggered updates may be trandmitted.

It should say:

RIP implementations must also limit the rate at
which triggered updates may be transmitted.

Report New Errata