Lindem
> Cc: Peter Psenak (ppsenak) ; Tony Li ;
> RFC Errata System ; nmal...@protokols.ru; Shraddha
> Hegde ; Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil)
> ; Ketan Talaulikar ;
> arkadiy.gu...@edwardjones.com; lsr
> Subject: Re: [Lsr] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9350 (7376)
>
> “Hold
, 2023 4:57 AM
To: Acee Lindem
Cc: Peter Psenak (ppsenak) ; Tony Li ; RFC
Errata System ; nmal...@protokols.ru; Shraddha Hegde
; Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil) ;
Ketan Talaulikar ; arkadiy.gu...@edwardjones.com; lsr
Subject: Re: [Lsr] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9350 (7376)
“Hold For Document
> On Mar 6, 2023, at 7:57 AM, John Scudder wrote:
>
> “Hold For Document Update” is exactly for the purpose [1] of making nominal
> but inessential improvements. This one seems roughly on the level of “trivial
> grammar correction” (item 4 of [1]) which is in-scope for HFDU, and
>
“Hold For Document Update” is exactly for the purpose [1] of making nominal but
inessential improvements. This one seems roughly on the level of “trivial
grammar correction” (item 4 of [1]) which is in-scope for HFDU, and apparently
the lack of expansion confused at least one person, so I’m
Hi Peter,
I agree it is not an errata. We really don’t want to set precedence of having
published RFC text nominally improved via Errata. I’ve copied John for Errata
resolution.
Thanks,
Acee
> On Mar 6, 2023, at 4:14 AM, Peter Psenak wrote:
>
> Acee,
>
> if you ask me, I would not do
Acee,
if you ask me, I would not do anything. "IS" is correct in the text and
it's well known.
my 2c,
Peter
On 05/03/2023 14:32, Acee Lindem wrote:
Hi Tony,
On Mar 4, 2023, at 4:42 PM, Tony Li wrote:
Hi all,
IMHO, this erratum is correct, but the proposed fix is incorrect.
In this
Hi Tony,
> On Mar 4, 2023, at 4:42 PM, Tony Li wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> IMHO, this erratum is correct, but the proposed fix is incorrect.
>
> In this case, the original text seeks to use ‘IS’ as an abbreviation for
> ‘Intermediate System’ (i.e., router). Thus, a better fix would be:
>
>
Hi all,
IMHO, this erratum is correct, but the proposed fix is incorrect.
In this case, the original text seeks to use ‘IS’ as an abbreviation for
‘Intermediate System’ (i.e., router). Thus, a better fix would be:
One of the limitations of IS-IS [ISO10589] is that the length of a
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9350,
"IGP Flexible Algorithm".
--
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7376
--
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Nikolai Malykh
