On 18/11/2022 20:18, RFC Errata System wrote:
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8294,
"Common YANG Data Types for the Routing Area".
--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7255
--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]>
Jeff
I cannot get my mind around this.
Following the URL, or searching the IANA web site, I find definitions of
RD Types 0, 1, 2; I cannot find a type 6.
I wanted to see the definition of type 6 to see when it was defined to
see if that comes after the publication of RFC8294, in which case it
would not be an erratum but I cannot find a definition.
Tom Petch
Section: 3
Original Text
-------------
typedef route-distinguisher {
type string {
pattern
'(0:(6553[0-5]|655[0-2][0-9]|65[0-4][0-9]{2}|'
+ '6[0-4][0-9]{3}|'
+ '[1-5][0-9]{4}|[1-9][0-9]{0,3}|0):(429496729[0-5]|'
+ '42949672[0-8][0-9]|'
+ '4294967[01][0-9]{2}|429496[0-6][0-9]{3}|'
+ '42949[0-5][0-9]{4}|'
+ '4294[0-8][0-9]{5}|429[0-3][0-9]{6}|'
+ '42[0-8][0-9]{7}|4[01][0-9]{8}|'
+ '[1-3][0-9]{9}|[1-9][0-9]{0,8}|0))|'
+ '(1:((([0-9]|[1-9][0-9]|1[0-9]{2}|2[0-4][0-9]|'
+ '25[0-5])\.){3}([0-9]|[1-9][0-9]|'
+ '1[0-9]{2}|2[0-4][0-9]|25[0-5])):(6553[0-5]|'
+ '655[0-2][0-9]|'
+ '65[0-4][0-9]{2}|6[0-4][0-9]{3}|'
+ '[1-5][0-9]{4}|[1-9][0-9]{0,3}|0))|'
+ '(2:(429496729[0-5]|42949672[0-8][0-9]|'
+ '4294967[01][0-9]{2}|'
+ '429496[0-6][0-9]{3}|42949[0-5][0-9]{4}|'
+ '4294[0-8][0-9]{5}|'
+ '429[0-3][0-9]{6}|42[0-8][0-9]{7}|4[01][0-9]{8}|'
+ '[1-3][0-9]{9}|[1-9][0-9]{0,8}|0):'
+ '(6553[0-5]|655[0-2][0-9]|65[0-4][0-9]{2}|'
+ '6[0-4][0-9]{3}|'
+ '[1-5][0-9]{4}|[1-9][0-9]{0,3}|0))|'
+ '(6(:[a-fA-F0-9]{2}){6})|'
+ '(([3-57-9a-fA-F]|[1-9a-fA-F][0-9a-fA-F]{1,3}):'
+ '[0-9a-fA-F]{1,12})';
}
Corrected Text
--------------
typedef route-distinguisher {
type string {
pattern
'(0:(6553[0-5]|655[0-2][0-9]|65[0-4][0-9]{2}|'
+ '6[0-4][0-9]{3}|'
+ '[1-5][0-9]{4}|[1-9][0-9]{0,3}|0):(429496729[0-5]|'
+ '42949672[0-8][0-9]|'
+ '4294967[01][0-9]{2}|429496[0-6][0-9]{3}|'
+ '42949[0-5][0-9]{4}|'
+ '4294[0-8][0-9]{5}|429[0-3][0-9]{6}|'
+ '42[0-8][0-9]{7}|4[01][0-9]{8}|'
+ '[1-3][0-9]{9}|[1-9][0-9]{0,8}|0))|'
+ '(1:((([0-9]|[1-9][0-9]|1[0-9]{2}|2[0-4][0-9]|'
+ '25[0-5])\.){3}([0-9]|[1-9][0-9]|'
+ '1[0-9]{2}|2[0-4][0-9]|25[0-5])):(6553[0-5]|'
+ '655[0-2][0-9]|'
+ '65[0-4][0-9]{2}|6[0-4][0-9]{3}|'
+ '[1-5][0-9]{4}|[1-9][0-9]{0,3}|0))|'
+ '(2:(429496729[0-5]|42949672[0-8][0-9]|'
+ '4294967[01][0-9]{2}|'
+ '429496[0-6][0-9]{3}|42949[0-5][0-9]{4}|'
+ '4294[0-8][0-9]{5}|'
+ '429[0-3][0-9]{6}|42[0-8][0-9]{7}|4[01][0-9]{8}|'
+ '[1-3][0-9]{9}|[1-9][0-9]{0,8}|0):'
+ '(6553[0-5]|655[0-2][0-9]|65[0-4][0-9]{2}|'
+ '6[0-4][0-9]{3}|'
+ '[1-5][0-9]{4}|[1-9][0-9]{0,3}|0))';
}
Notes
-----
Type 6 route-distinguishers are not defined. See the registry at IANA:
https://www.iana.org/assignments/route-distinguisher-types/route-distinguisher-types.xhtml
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.
--------------------------------------
RFC8294 (draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types-17)
--------------------------------------
Title : Common YANG Data Types for the Routing Area
Publication Date : December 2017
Author(s) : X. Liu, Y. Qu, A. Lindem, C. Hopps, L. Berger
Category : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source : Routing Area Working Group
Area : Routing
Stream : IETF
Verifying Party : IESG
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
.
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
