I don't think it was an editorial error, it is technical error, AB
On 9/24/13, RFC Errata System <[email protected]> wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2328, > "OSPF Version 2". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=2328&eid=3734 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Ramakrishna DTV <[email protected]> > > Section: 8.2 > > Original Text > ------------- > The AuType specified in the packet must match the AuType > specified for the associated area. > > > Corrected Text > -------------- > The AuType specified in the packet must match the AuType > specified for the associated interface. > > > Notes > ----- > In OSPFv2, authentication is configured per interface and not per area. > Appendix D clarifies this: "The authentication type is configurable on a > per-interface > (or equivalently, on a per-network/subnet) basis." > > Instructions: > ------------- > This errata 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 (IESG) > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC2328 (no draft string recorded) > -------------------------------------- > Title : OSPF Version 2 > Publication Date : April 1998 > Author(s) : J. Moy > Category : INTERNET STANDARD > Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP > Area : Routing > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
