We have proposed the following erratum for RFC 7432. Opinions?
Regards, Jakob. -----Original Message----- From: RFC Errata System <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2018 12:37 PM To: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Giles Heron (giheron) <[email protected]>; [email protected] Cc: Krishnamoorthy Arumugham (karumugh) <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7432 (5523) The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7432, "BGP MPLS-Based Ethernet VPN". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5523 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Krishnamoorthy Arumugham <[email protected]> Section: 7 Original Text ------------- Clarifications to following sub-sections: Section 7.1 Section 7.2 Section 7.5 Corrected Text -------------- Section 7.1: Add below text to the section 7.1 regarding the encoding of MPLS label: "The value of the 20-bit MPLS label is encoded in the high-order 20 bits of the 3 bytes MPLS Label field." Section 7.2: Add below text to the section 7.2 regarding the encoding of both the MPLS label fields: "The value of the 20-bit MPLS label is encoded in the high-order 20 bits of the 3 bytes MPLS Label field for both MPLS Label1 and MPLS Label2." Section 7.5: Add below text to the section 7.5 regarding the encoding of ESI Label fields: "The value of the 20-bit MPLS label is encoded in the high-order 20 bits of the ESI Label field." Notes ----- MPLS label is a 20-bit value and is stored in a 3 bytes field in a packet. The 20-bit MPLS label value is generally stored in higher order 20 bits of the 3 byte label field. The exact encoding to be followed for storing MPLS label values are not explicitly mentioned in the RFC 7432 under section 7.1, 7.2 and 7.5 for different types of EVPN routes. This lead to ambiguity in different implementations. Hence a clarification is required. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC7432 (draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-11) -------------------------------------- Title : BGP MPLS-Based Ethernet VPN Publication Date : February 2015 Author(s) : A. Sajassi, Ed., R. Aggarwal, N. Bitar, A. Isaac, J. Uttaro, J. Drake, W. Henderickx Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
