Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4666 (2518)

I'll check into this with the A-Ds.

Lyndon



-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Tüxen [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 4:25 AM
To: Ong, Lyndon
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Gonzalo Camarillo; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; RFC Errata System
Subject: Re: [Sigtran] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4666 (2518)

Hi Lyndon,

can you work on getting this ERRATA removed? It is wrong.

Best regards
Michael

On Sep 14, 2010, at 12:53 PM, RFC Errata System wrote:

> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC4666,
> "Signaling System 7 (SS7) Message Transfer Part 3 (MTP3) - User Adaptation Layer (M3UA)".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4666&eid=2518
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Suyash Karmarkar <[email protected]>
> 
> Section: 3.2.
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> 3.2. Variable-Length Parameter Format
> 
> M3UA-Specific parameters. These TLV parameters are specific to the
> M3UA protocol:
> 
> Registration Result                               0x0208
> Deregistration Result                             0x0209
> Local Routing Key Identifier                      0x020a
> 
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> 3.2. Variable-Length Parameter Format
> 
> Common Parameters. These TLV parameters are common across the
> different adaptation layers:
> 
> Registration Result                 0x0014,
> Deregistration Result               0x0015,
> Local Routing Key Identifier        0x0018,
> 
> Notes
> -----
> As the above three parameters mentioned are used for the same purpose in RFC 3868 and in RFC 4666. So the above parameters in RFC 4666 Section 3.2, the M3UA-Specific parameters can be considered to move them into the common parameters section 3.2 of RFC 4666 with the above sepecified values.
> 
> The advantage could be, for one who implements both SUA & M3UA can use the same encoding and decoding mechanisms/code for both the implementations.
> 
> 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. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC4666 (draft-ietf-sigtran-rfc3332bis-06)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Signaling System 7 (SS7) Message Transfer Part 3 (MTP3) - User Adaptation Layer (M3UA)
> Publication Date    : September 2006
> Author(s)           : K. Morneault, Ed., J. Pastor-Balbas, Ed.
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Signaling Transport
> Area                : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
> _______________________________________________
> Sigtran mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran
> 


_______________________________________________
Sigtran mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sigtran