RFC Errata

Errata Search

Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

RFC 5185, "OSPF Multi-Area Adjacency", May 2008

Source of RFC: ospf (rtg)

Errata ID: 3595
Status: Rejected
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT

Reported By: Marek Karasek
Date Reported: 2013-04-17
Rejected by: Stewart Bryant
Date Rejected: 2013-05-06

Section 4 says:

   A link-LSA SHOULD NOT be advertised for a multi-area adjacency.  The
   neighbor's IPv6 link local address can be learned in other ways,
   e.g., it can be extracted from the IPv6 header of Hello packets
   received over the multi-area adjacency.  The neighbor IPv6 link local
   address is required for the OSPFv3 route next-hop calculation on
   multi-access networks (refer to Section of [OSPFV3]).

It should say:

OSPFv3 supports two Address Families (AF), AF IPv6 and AF IPv4, using
separate instances [RFC 5338]. The route calculation differs for the
IPv4 and IPv6 address families with respect to the next-hop
determination. OSPFv3 instances supporting an IPv6 AF SHOULD learn the
IPv6 next-hop address from the IPv6 Header source address and SHOULD
NOT advertise a Link-LSA for a multi-area adjacency. However, for
OSPFv3 instances supporting an IPv4 AF, the next-hop address cannot be
learned from the OSPFv3 hellos and require advertisement of the
Link-LSA. Hence, OSPFv3 instances supporting an IPv4 AF SHOULD
advertise a Link-LSA for the a multi-area adjacency (refer to section
2.5 of [RFC 5838]). If the Link-LSA is not advertised, the OSPFv3
instance MAY learn the IPv4 next-hop address from the Link-LSA
advertised on the primary adjacency.


RFC5185 describes next-hop calculation which is not applicable to OSPFv3 process supporting AF IPv4 as defined in RFC5838. Errata defines how RFC5838 OSPFv3 process supporting AF IPv4 calculates next-hop address on multi-area interface.
This is a technical change and is thus cannot be addressed through the errata process. The correct process for addressing this concern is by writing a draft that updates RFC5158 and testing whether there is OSPF WG and IETF consensus for publication of the proposed update.

Report New Errata

Advanced Search