errata logo graphic

Found 3 records.

Status: Verified (1)

RFC5307, "IS-IS Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", October 2008

Source of RFC: isis (rtg)

Errata ID: 1554

Status: Verified
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2008-10-09
Verifier Name: Adrian Farrel
Date Verified: 2012-08-16

Section 1.3, pg.6 says:

|  When the Switching Capability field is LSC, there is no Switching
   Capability specific information field present.

It should say:

|  When the Switching Capability field is LSC or FSC, there is no
   Switching Capability specific information field present.

Notes:

Location is the penultimate paragraph in Section 1.3, on mid-page 6.

Rationale:
In the same section, the list on top of page 5 shows the possible
Switching Capability values, their meaning and short name.
Later on, the RFC says:

The content of the Switching Capability specific information field
depends on the value of the Switching Capability field.

... and then starts to discuss the various cases.

The quoted paragraph is the last one in this discussion, and
it addresses the penultimate case in the list; the last case,
FSC, is not dealt with in any way.

Hence, the 'Switching Capability-specific information' in the
Interface Switching Capability Descriptor is underspecified.

The above correction tries to fix this deficiency to the best
knowledge of the submitter of what has been intended.


Status: Held for Document Update (2)

RFC5307, "IS-IS Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", October 2008

Source of RFC: isis (rtg)

Errata ID: 1552

Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2008-10-09
Held for Document Update by: Adrian Farrel
Date Held: 2012-08-09

Section 1.1, pg.2 says:

1.1.  Link Local/Remote Identifiers

|  A Link Local Interface Identifier is a sub-TLV of the extended IS
   reachability TLV.  [...]

It should say:

1.1.  Link Local/Remote Identifiers

|  The Link Local/Remote Identifiers TLV is a sub-TLV of the extended IS
   reachability TLV.  [...]


Notes:

Rationale: Confusion in Terminology:
The term "Link Local Interface Identifier" does not
appear anywhere else in the document; the shorter form,
"Link Local Identifier" is used to denote a specific
component of the sub-TLV under consideration.
Hence, the precise name of the sub-TLV should be used.


Errata ID: 1553

Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2008-10-09
Held for Document Update by: Stewart Bryant

Section 1.3, pg.5 says:

   The Minimum LSP Bandwidth is encoded in a 4-octet field in the IEEE
   floating point format.  The units are bytes (not bits!) per second.
   The Interface MTU is encoded as a 2-octet integer, and carries the
|  MTU value in the units of bytes.

It should say:

   The Minimum LSP Bandwidth is encoded in a 4-octet field in the IEEE
   floating point format.  The units are bytes (not bits!) per second.
   The Interface MTU is encoded as a 2-octet integer, and carries the
|  MTU value in units of bytes.

Notes:

Location is first paragraph below the diagram on page 5.

Rationale: Surprising use of article.

On the other hand, there are other places in the document
where an expected article is missing, for instance, the
same clause recurring four times in Sections 1.1 - 1.4,

The following illustrates encoding of ...

should better say:

The following illustrates the encoding of ...


Report New Errata