RFC 4875, "Extensions to Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) for Point-to-Multipoint TE Label Switched Paths (LSPs)", May 2007

Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 6510

Errata ID: 2492
Status: Rejected
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2007-05-15
Rejected by: Adrian Farrel
Date Rejected: 2010-08-21

Section 19 says:

Erratum created by duplication from multipart Erratum 961 raised by Alfred Hoenes.

(12)  Section 19

(12a) -- lack of precision / completeness

The sub-sections of Section 19 mostly remain a bit unspecific with
respect to Class *numbers* (only Section 19.3 does supply these),
whereas C-Type values always are specified fully.

For uniformity and completeness, and for the ease of the reader,
the following changes/amendments (determined after IANA lookup)
should be applied -- adopting the style of the RFC text from
Section 19.3 --, to the lines immediately above the class data
structure diagrams (I use abbreviated, diff-like notation):

o  in Section 19.1.1 (on mid-page 39):

   Class = SESSION, P2MP_LSP_TUNNEL_IPv4 C-Type = 13
--
   SESSION Class = 1, P2MP_LSP_TUNNEL_IPv4 C-Type = 13

o  in Section 19.1.2 (on page 40):

   Class = SESSION, P2MP_LSP_TUNNEL_IPv6 C-Type = 14
--
   SESSION Class = 1, P2MP_LSP_TUNNEL_IPv6 C-Type = 14

o  in Section 19.2.1 (on top of page 41):

   Class = SENDER_TEMPLATE, P2MP_LSP_TUNNEL_IPv4 C-Type = 12
--
   SENDER_TEMPLATE Class = 11, P2MP_LSP_TUNNEL_IPv4 C-Type = 12

o  in Section 19.2.2 (on top of page 42):

   Class = SENDER_TEMPLATE, P2MP_LSP_TUNNEL_IPv6 C-Type = 13
--
   SENDER_TEMPLATE Class = 11, P2MP_LSP_TUNNEL_IPv6 C-Type = 13

o  in Section 19.4.1 (at the bottom of page 43):

   Class = FILTER_SPEC, P2MP LSP_IPv4 C-Type = 12
--
   FILTER_SPEC Class = 10, P2MP LSP_IPv4 C-Type = 12

o  in Section 19.4.2 (at the top of page 44):

   Class = FILTER_SPEC, P2MP LSP_IPv6 C-Type = 13
--
   FILTER_SPEC Class = 10, P2MP LSP_IPv6 C-Type = 13

o  in Section 19.5 (on page 44):

                       The class of the P2MP SERO is the same as the
   SERO defined in [RFC4873].
--
                       The class of the P2MP SERO is 200, as assigned
   for the SERO in [RFC4873].

o  in Section 19.6 (on page 44):

                The class of the P2MP SRRO is the same as the SRRO
   defined in [RFC4873].
--
                The class of the P2MP SRRO is 201, as assigned for
   the SRRO in [RFC4873].

Notes:

--VERIFIER NOTES--
The risk of errors is reduced by only defining numbers once in a document. In any case, sufficient information exists in the document to make implementation simple.

Report New Errata