RFC Errata
Found 5 records.
Status: Verified (1)
RFC 8466, "A YANG Data Model for Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (L2VPN) Service Delivery", October 2018
Source of RFC: l2sm (ops)
Errata ID: 5615
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Nikolai Malykh
Date Reported: 2019-01-28
Verifier Name: Ignas Bagdonas
Date Verified: 2019-07-09
Section 5.10.1 says:
The svc-bandwidth parameter must include a "cos-id" parameter if the "type" is set to "bw-per-cos". The cos-id can be assigned based on either (1) the IEEE 802.1p value [IEEE-802-1D] in the C-tag or (2) the Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) in the Ethernet frame header. Service frames are metered against the bandwidth profile based on the cos-id.
It should say:
The svc-bandwidth parameter must include a "cos-id" parameter if the "type" is set to "bw-per-cos". The cos-id can be assigned based on either (1) the IEEE 802.1p value [IEEE-802-1D] in the C-tag or (2) the Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) in the IP header. Service frames are metered against the bandwidth profile based on the cos-id.
Notes:
The DSCP field is part of the IP packet header, not the Ethernet frame руфвук.
Status: Reported (4)
RFC 8466, "A YANG Data Model for Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (L2VPN) Service Delivery", October 2018
Source of RFC: l2sm (ops)
Errata ID: 5922
Status: Reported
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alexander ("Sasha") Vainshtein
Date Reported: 2019-11-27
Section 8 says:
identity bgp-vpls {
base service-type;
description
"BGP-based multipoint VPLS service type. This VPLS uses a
BGP control plane as described in RFCs 4761 and 6624.";
}
identity vpws-evpn {
base service-type;
description
"VPWS service type using Ethernet VPNs (EVPNs)
as specified in RFC 7432.";
}
It should say:
identity bgp-vpls {
base service-type;
description
"BGP-based multipoint VPLS service type. This VPLS uses a
BGP control plane as described in RFCs 4761 and 6624.";
}
identity evpn {
base service-type;
description
" EVPN service type as specified in RFC 7432"
}
identity vpws-evpn {
base service-type;
description
"VPWS service type using Ethernet VPNs (EVPNs)
as specified in RFC 7432.";
}
Notes:
The service type for an EVPN service as defined in RFC 7432 is missing.
Errata ID: 6383
Status: Reported
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Julian Lucek
Date Reported: 2021-01-08
Section 8 says:
container service {
container svc-bandwidth {
if-feature "input-bw";
list bandwidth {
key "direction type";
leaf direction {
type identityref {
base bw-direction;
}
description
"Indicates the bandwidth direction. It can be
the bandwidth download direction from the SP to
the site or the bandwidth upload direction from
the site to the SP.";
}
Notes:
The svc-bandwidth container is triggered by if-feature "input-bw". However, that container can contain input-bw only, output-bw only or both. It might be better to have two separate containers, one for input-bw and the other for output-bw, triggered by if-feature "input-bw" and if-feature "output-bw" respectively.
Errata ID: 5921
Status: Reported
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alexander ("Sasha") Vainshtein
Date Reported: 2019-11-27
Section 8 says:
identity vpws-evpn {
base service-type;
description
"VPWS service type using Ethernet VPNs (EVPNs)
as specified in RFC 7432.";
identity pbb-evpn {
base service-type;
description
"Provider Backbone Bridge (PBB) service type using
EVPNs as specified in RFC 7432.";
}
It should say:
identity vpws-evpn {
base service-type;
description
"VPWS service type using Ethernet VPNs (EVPNs)
as specified in RFC 8214.";
identity pbb-evpn {
base service-type;
description
"Provider Backbone Bridge (PBB) service type using
EVPNs as specified in RFC 7623.";
}
Notes:
Neither VPWS-EVPN nor PBB-EVPN are mentioned in RFC 7432.
The former is defined in RFC 8214, and the latter - in RFC 7623.
Please note also that RFC 7623 is not mentioned as one of the references.
Errata ID: 6384
Status: Reported
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Julian Lucek
Date Reported: 2021-01-08
Section 8 says:
identity pbb-evpn {
base service-type;
description
"Provider Backbone Bridge (PBB) service type using
EVPNs as specified in RFC 7432.";
}
It should say:
identity evpn {
base service-type;
description
"EVPN service type as specified in RFC 7432.";
}
Notes:
The mention of PBB is a mistake, it should be normal (non-PBB) EVPN, given that Section 3.1 lists EVPN and not PBB-EVPN among the supported L2VPN types. However, the reference to RFC 7432 in the original text box above is correct, as that RFC deals with EVPN, not PBB-EVPN.
(n.b. see erratum 5921 that has the "opposite" interpretation, i.e. that pbb-evpn is correct but that the RFC number is wrong)