RFC Errata
Found 3 records.
Status: Held for Document Update (2)
RFC 7543, "Covering Prefixes Outbound Route Filter for BGP-4", May 2015
Source of RFC: bess (rtg)
Errata ID: 4669
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ron Bonica
Date Reported: 2016-04-15
Held for Document Update by: Alvaro Retana
Date Held: 2016-04-15
Section 4 and 5 says:
V-spoke1 establishes a BGP session with the RR, negotiating the CP-ORF capability as well as the Multiprotocol Extensions capability
It should say:
V-spoke1 establishes a BGP session with the RR, advertising the ORF capability (including the CP ORF Type in its ORF Type list) as well as the Multiprotocol Extensions capability
Notes:
This text occurs twice, once in Section 4 and again in Section 5
Errata ID: 5258
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alexander ("Sasha") Vainshtein
Date Reported: 2018-02-08
Held for Document Update by: Alvaro Retana
Date Held: 2018-03-14
Section Section 5 says:
The UMR is characterized as follows: o EVPN Route Type is equal to MAC/IP Advertisement Route o MAC address length is equal to 0 o IP address length is equal to 0
It should say:
In Section 5: The UMR is characterized as follows: o EVPN Route Type is equal to MAC/IP Advertisement Route o MAC address length is equal to 48 o IP address length is equal to 0
Notes:
The original text provides conflicting definitions of the MAC Address Length in the Unknown MAC Route (UMR).
Since the UMR is a MAC/IP Advertisement Route defined in RFC 7432, and since this RFC states that the MAC Address Length in these routes is 48, the text in Section 5 should be corrected to match RFC 7432 as well as the text in Section 1 of this RFC (where MAC Address Length in the UMR is correctly defined as 48).
Status: Rejected (1)
RFC 7543, "Covering Prefixes Outbound Route Filter for BGP-4", May 2015
Source of RFC: bess (rtg)
Errata ID: 4402
Status: Rejected
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ron Bonica
Date Reported: 2015-06-26
Rejected by: Alvaro Retana
Date Rejected: 2016-04-15
Section 7 says:
+------------------------------------------------+---------------+ | Registry | Code Point | +------------------------------------------------+---------------+ | BGP Outbound Route Filtering (ORF) Types | CP-ORF (65) | | Transitive Opaque Extended Community Sub-Types | CP-ORF (0x03) | +------------------------------------------------+---------------+
It should say:
+------------------------------------------------+---------------+ | Registry | Code Point | +------------------------------------------------+---------------+ | BGP Outbound Route Filtering (ORF) Types | CP-ORF (65) | | Transitive Opaque Extended Community Sub-Types | CP-ORF (0x03) | | Capability Codes | CP-ORF (72) | +------------------------------------------------+---------------+
Notes:
In the original text, we forgot to mention the value of the BGP capability code.
--VERIFIER NOTES--
RFC 5291 describes The Outbound Route Filter (ORF) Capability for BGP. According to RFC 5291, when two BGP speakers initiate a session between one another and they intend to exchange ORFs of any type, they must advertise the ORF capability. The ORF capability is registered with a value of 3 in the IANA BGP Capability Code Registry. The ORF capability also includes a list of ORF types that the BGP speaker can send and/or receive. IANA also maintains a BGP Outbound Route Filtering (ORF) Types registry.
RFC 7543 describes a new ORF type, called the Covering Prefix ORF (CP-ORF). RFC 7543 should conform to generic ORF procedures defined in RFC 5291. Specifically, when two BGP speakers initiate a session between one another and they intend to exchange CP-ORFs, they must advertise the ORF capability (value 3). The ORF capability must include CP-ORF (value 65) in the ORF type list.