RFC Errata


Errata Search
 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 5 records.

Status: Verified (3)

RFC 4427, "Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", March 2006

Source of RFC: ccamp (rtg)

Errata ID: 95
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2006-08-12
Verifier Name: Dimitri Papadimitriou
Date Verified: 2006-08-14

Section 7.1 says: 

   Note that the restoration resources must be pre-computed, must
   be signaled, and may be selected a priori, but may not cross-
   connected.  Thus, the restoration LSP is not able to carry any
   extra-traffic.

It should say:

   Note that the restoration resources must be pre-computed, must
   be signaled, and may be selected a priori, but may not be cross-
   connected.  Thus, the restoration LSP is not able to carry any
   extra-traffic.

Notes:

missing verb

from pending

Errata ID: 743
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2006-08-12
Verifier Name: Dimitri Papadimitriou
Date Verified: 2006-08-14

Section 5 says: 

   Failure notification phase is used 1) to inform intermediate nodes
   that LSP(s)/span(s) failure has occurred and has been detected and 2)
   to inform the recovery deciding entities (which can correspond to any
   intermediate or end-point of the failed LSP/span) that the
   corresponding LSP/span is not available.

It should say:

|  The failure notification phase is used 1) to inform intermediate
   nodes that LSP(s)/span(s) failure has occurred and has been detected
   and 2) to inform the recovery deciding entities (which can correspond
   to any intermediate or end-point of the failed LSP/span) that the
   corresponding LSP/span is not available.

Notes:

missing article

from pending

Errata ID: 745
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2006-08-12
Verifier Name: Dimitri Papadimitriou
Date Verified: 2006-08-14

Section 6.3 says: 

   At the egress node, the normal traffic is selected
|  from either its working or one of the protection LSP/span.

   Unprotected extra traffic can be transported over the M protection
|  LSP/span whenever the protection LSPs/spans is not used to carry a
   normal traffic.

It should say:

   At the egress node, the normal traffic is selected
|  from either its working or one of the protection LSPs/spans.

   Unprotected extra traffic can be transported over the M protection
|  LSPs/spans whenever the protection LSPs/spans is not used to carry a
   normal traffic.

Notes:

singular-->plural

from pending

Status: Held for Document Update (2)

RFC 4427, "Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", March 2006

Source of RFC: ccamp (rtg)

Errata ID: 1834
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Vishwas Manral
Date Reported: 2009-08-20
Held for Document Update by: Adrian Farrel
Date Held: 2009-08-24

Section 4.6 says: 

   E. M:N (M, N > 1, N >= M) type:

   A set of M specific recovery LSPs/spans protects a set of up to N
   specific working LSPs/spans.  The two sets are explicitly identified.
   Extra traffic can be transported over the M recovery LSPs/spans when
   available.  All the LSPs/spans must start and end at the same nodes.

It should say:

   E. M:N (M, N > 1, N >= M > 1) type:

   A set of M specific recovery LSPs/spans protects a set of up to N
   specific working LSPs/spans.  The two sets are explicitly identified.
   Extra traffic can be transported over the M recovery LSPs/spans when
   available.  All the LSPs/spans must start and end at the same nodes.

Notes:

M > 1 is not specified

[Adrian Farrel]
M > 1 was intended by the language "M, N > 1"
This has been confused by the othe use of a comma

Errata ID: 1835
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Vishwas Manral
Date Reported: 2009-08-20
Held for Document Update by: Adrian Farrel
Date Held: 2009-08-24

Section 6.3 says: 

6.3. M:N (M, N > 1, N >= M) Protection


   M:N protection has N working LSPs/spans carrying normal traffic and M
   protection LSP/span that may carry extra-traffic.

It should say:

6.3. M:N (M, N > 1, N >= M > 1) Protection


   M:N protection has N working LSPs/spans carrying normal traffic and M
   protection LSP/span that may carry extra-traffic.

Notes:

M > 1 is added

[Adrian Farrel]
M > 1 was intended by the language "M, N > 1"
This has been confused by the other use of a comma

Report New Errata



Advanced Search