RFC Errata


Errata Search

 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 2 records.

Status: Verified (2)

RFC4920, "Crankback Signaling Extensions for MPLS and GMPLS RSVP-TE", July 2007

Source of RFC: ccamp (rtg)

Errata ID: 4480

Status: Verified
Type: Technical

Reported By: Dhruv Dhody
Date Reported: 2015-09-20
Verifier Name: Deborah Brungard
Date Verified: 2015-11-18

Section 6.2 says:

For types 10 and 23, the Value field has the 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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |   Length      |     IS-IS Area Identifier                     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      ~                     IS-IS Area Identifier (continued)         ~
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

       Length

          Length of the actual (non-padded) IS-IS Area Identifier in
          octets.  Valid values are from 2 to 11 inclusive.

It should say:

For types 10 and 23, the Value field has the 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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |   Length      |     IS-IS Area Identifier                     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      ~                     IS-IS Area Identifier (continued)         ~
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

       Length

          Length of the actual (non-padded) IS-IS Area Identifier in
          octets.  Valid values are from 1 to 13 inclusive.

Notes:

IS-IS area IDs can vary from 1 to 13 bytes in length (max NSAP length is 20, minus 1 byte for NSEL, minus 6 bytes for SysID).

*Noted by Jonathan Hardwick in another document that was using the same data.

Errata ID: 1460

Status: Verified
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Lou Berger
Date Reported: 2008-06-27
Verifier Name: Adrian Farrel
Date Verified: 2010-01-02

Section 7,1 and 7.2 says:

Section 7.1:

"Path_State_Remove_Flag"

Section 7.2:
"Path_State_Remove Flag"

It should say:

Both sections:
"Path_State_Removed flag ([RFC3473])"

Report New Errata



Search RFCs
Advanced Search
×