RFC Errata


Errata Search

 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

RFC 4632, "Classless Inter-domain Routing (CIDR): The Internet Address Assignment and Aggregation Plan", August 2006

Source of RFC: grow (ops)

Errata ID: 38
Status: Rejected
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2006-11-01
Rejected by: Tony Li
Date Rejected: 2006-11-01

Section 2 says:

   3.  Eventual exhaustion of the 32-bit IPv4 address space.

       It was clear that then-current rates of Internet growth would
       cause the first two problems to become critical sometime between
       1993 and 1995.  Work already in progress on topological
       assignment of addressing for Connectionless Network Service
       (CLNS), which was presented to the community at the Boulder IETF
       in December of 1990, led to thoughts on how to re-structure the
       32-bit IPv4 address space to increase its lifespan.  Work in the
       ROAD group followed and eventually resulted in the publication of
       [RFC1338], and later, [RFC1519].

       The design and deployment of CIDR was intended to solve these
       problems by providing a mechanism to slow the growth of global
       routing tables and to reduce the rate of consumption of IPv4
       address space.  It did not and does not attempt to solve the
       third problem, which is of a more long-term nature; instead, it
       endeavors to ease enough of the short- to mid-term difficulties
       to allow the Internet to continue to function efficiently while
       progress is made on a longer-term solution.

       More historical background on this effort and on the ROAD group
       may be found in [RFC1380] and at [LWRD].

3.  Classless Addressing as a Solution

It should say:

   3.  Eventual exhaustion of the 32-bit IPv4 address space.

   It was clear that then-current rates of Internet growth would
   cause the first two problems to become critical sometime between
   1993 and 1995.  Work already in progress on topological
   assignment of addressing for Connectionless Network Service
   (CLNS), which was presented to the community at the Boulder IETF
   in December of 1990, led to thoughts on how to re-structure the
   32-bit IPv4 address space to increase its lifespan.  Work in the
   ROAD group followed and eventually resulted in the publication of
   [RFC1338], and later, [RFC1519].

   The design and deployment of CIDR was intended to solve these
   problems by providing a mechanism to slow the growth of global
   routing tables and to reduce the rate of consumption of IPv4
   address space.  It did not and does not attempt to solve the
   third problem, which is of a more long-term nature; instead, it
   endeavors to ease enough of the short- to mid-term difficulties
   to allow the Internet to continue to function efficiently while
   progress is made on a longer-term solution.

   More historical background on this effort and on the ROAD group
   may be found in [RFC1380] and at [LWRD].

3.  Classless Addressing as a Solution

Notes:

In Section 2, on page 4 of RFC 4632, the text after the
enumerated item '3.' up to the end of the section is indented
too much (by 4 columns), making it erroneously appear to belong
to that item '3.'

--VERIFIER COMMENT--
Thank you very much for your eagle eyes and your comments. I agree
with all of them. If you had submitted them during the Internet-draft
process, I would make all of these modifications immediately.
However, now that the RFC is issued, I believe that we should be quite
a bit more conservative before issuing Errata, so as to not congest
the Errata and obscure vital and substantive changes that might affect
actual interoperability of standards interpretation. With that view
in mind, I'd like to suggest that we not issue any Errata at this
time. I look forward to your input on subsequent draft documents.

Report New Errata