RFC Errata
Found 2 records.
Status: Held for Document Update (1)
RFC 9067, "A YANG Data Model for Routing Policy", October 2021
Source of RFC: rtgwg (rtg)
Errata ID: 6844
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT, PDF, HTML
Reported By: Kris Lambrechts
Date Reported: 2022-02-10
Held for Document Update by: Alvaro Retana
Date Held: 2022-02-11
Section 7.2. grouping prefix says:
leaf mask-length-upper { type uint8 { range "1..128"; }
It should say:
leaf mask-length-upper { type uint8 { range "0..128"; }
Notes:
With the original definition, it is not possible to specify an exact match for the default routes (0.0.0.0/0 and ::/0) which is a valid use case.
===== AD Note ====
This report is valid, but the resolution requires an update to the YANG model and not just a text correction.
Status: Rejected (1)
RFC 9067, "A YANG Data Model for Routing Policy", October 2021
Source of RFC: rtgwg (rtg)
Errata ID: 6845
Status: Rejected
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT, PDF, HTML
Reported By: Kris Lambrechts
Date Reported: 2022-02-10
Rejected by: Alvaro Retana
Date Rejected: 2022-02-11
Section 7.2. says:
list prefix-list { key "ip-prefix mask-length-lower mask-length-upper"; description "List of prefixes in the prefix set."; uses prefix; }
It should say:
list prefix { key "ip-prefix mask-length-lower mask-length-upper"; description "List of prefixes in the prefix set."; uses prefix; }
Notes:
The name of this list is not natural and makes instance data hard to read. This is very apparent in the example in Appendix B. Policy Examples
--VERIFIER NOTES--
From the WG discussion: "This is a rather subjective comment since at this YANG data node is, in fact, a list. Also, it is a moot point since changing this would be a non-backward compatible YANG change."