RFC Errata


Errata Search
 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 2 records.

Status: Held for Document Update (2)

RFC 5735, "Special Use IPv4 Addresses", January 2010

Note: This RFC has been obsoleted by RFC 6890

Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 6598

Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUP
Area Assignment: int

Errata ID: 2092
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2010-03-21
Held for Document Update by: Brian Haberman

Section 7., 2nd para says: 

|  It should also be noted that some of these address spaces may be used
   legitimately outside a single administrative domain, and may appear
   on the global Internet.  [...]

It should say:

|  It should also be noted that some of these address blocks may be used
   legitimately outside a single administrative domain, and may appear
   on the global Internet.  [...]

Notes:

Rationale: Consistent use of terminology
(cf. Abstract, Sections 3 through 5, 1st para of same section).

Errata ID: 2093
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2010-03-21
Held for Document Update by: Brian Haberman

Section Appendix A says: 

   Address blocks that were reserved for a special purpose in RFC 3330
   but are no longer reserved for any special purpose and are available
|  for allocation are no longer listed in Sections 4 or 5.  The
   following blocks have become available:

It should say:

   Address blocks that were reserved for a special purpose in RFC 3330
   but are no longer reserved for any special purpose and are available
|  for allocation are no longer listed in Sections 3 and 4.  The
   following blocks have become available:

Notes:

Rationale: Adjust internal references.

Further:
Under the above introduction, the 6th and 7th bullet are misplaced;
they do not refer to address blocks that "bave become available" and
are no longer listed, they mention _newly assigned_ address blocks.

Thus, to avoid confusion, the final part of the Appendix,

- 191.255.0.0/16 is not reserved and is subject to future allocation
by a RIR for assignment in the normal manner.

- 198.51.100.0/24 is assigned as "TEST-NET-2" for use in
documentation and example code.

- 203.0.113.0/24 is assigned as "TEST-NET-3" for use in
documentation and example code.

- 223.255.255.0/24 is not reserved and is subject to future
allocation by an RIR for assignment in the normal manner.

should better say:

- 191.255.0.0/16 is not reserved and is subject to future allocation
by a RIR for assignment in the normal manner.

- 223.255.255.0/24 is not reserved and is subject to future
allocation by an RIR for assignment in the normal manner.

Two address blocks were reserved for special purpose since RFC 3330
and have been added to Sections 3 and 4:

- 198.51.100.0/24 is assigned as "TEST-NET-2" for use in
documentation and example code.

- 203.0.113.0/24 is assigned as "TEST-NET-3" for use in
documentation and example code.

Report New Errata



Advanced Search