RFC Errata

Errata Search

Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 1 record.

Status: Rejected (1)

RFC 6571, "Loop-Free Alternate (LFA) Applicability in Service Provider (SP) Networks", June 2012

Source of RFC: rtgwg (rtg)

Errata ID: 3561
Status: Rejected
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT

Reported By: Ciril Rozic
Date Reported: 2013-03-20
Rejected by: Stewart Bryant
Date Rejected: 2013-05-06

Section says:

The LFA to P is via C2, because c < d + u.  It is node-protecting if
   eq2: x + e < x + c, i.e., if e < c.

It should say:

The LFA to P is via C2 if x + e < d + u + x.   It is node-protecting if
   eq2: x + e < c + x, i.e., if e < c.


The condition for the first sentence e < d + u is not stated in the assumptions in Section 3.

The second sentence is not incorrect, but "c + x" is more consistent with eq1 in Section 2.
The assumption that c < d + u is stated in section 3.0 (bullet 10) as a design assumption.

Report New Errata

Advanced Search