The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8231, "Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE".
-------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6627 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Oscar Gonzalez de Dios <[email protected]> Section: 6.4 Original Text ------------- <request>::= <RP> <END-POINTS> [<LSP>] [<LSPA>] [<BANDWIDTH>] [<metric-list>] [<RRO>[<BANDWIDTH>]] [<IRO>] [<LOAD-BALANCING>] Corrected Text -------------- <request>::= <RP> <END-POINTS> [<LSP>] [<CLASSTYPE>] [<LSPA>] [<BANDWIDTH>] [<metric-list>] [<RRO>[<BANDWIDTH>]] [<IRO>] [<LOAD-BALANCING>] Notes ----- RFC 5455 defines the CLASSTYPE object and specifies that the CLASSTYPE object MUST be inserted after the END-POINT objects. RFC 8231 defines the LSP object and specifies that the LSP object MUST be inserted after the END-POINTS object. Hence, it is not clear if CLASSTYPE or LSP goes after END-POINTS. Hence, to disambiguate and avoid interoperability issues, the proposal is to include the CLASSTYPE object in the updated grammar. The order would be <END-POINTS>[<LSP>][<CLASSTYPE>] 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. -------------------------------------- RFC8231 (draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-21) -------------------------------------- Title : Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE Publication Date : September 2017 Author(s) : E. Crabbe, I. Minei, J. Medved, R. Varga Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Path Computation Element Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
