It looks like "in the future" really means "subsequently (in the rest of
the document)" rather than "in the figure".

On Wed, Jul 2, 2025 at 6:35 AM Madison Church <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Gunter,
>
> We are unable to verify this erratum that the submitter marked as
> editorial, so we changed the Type to “Technical”. As Stream Approver,
> please review and set the Status and Type accordingly (see the definitions
> at https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata-definitions/).
>
> You may review the report at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8474
>
> Information on how to verify errata reports can be found at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/how-to-verify/
>
> Further information on errata can be found at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.php
>
> Thank you,
> RFC Editor/mc
>
> > On Jun 20, 2025, at 9:06 AM, RFC Errata System <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9136,
> > "IP Prefix Advertisement in Ethernet VPN (EVPN)".
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > You may review the report below and at:
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8474
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > Type: Editorial
> > Reported by: Zhaohui (Jeffrey) Zhang <[email protected]>
> >
> > Section: 4.1
> >
> > Original Text
> > -------------
> >   An example of inter-subnet forwarding between subnet SN1, which uses
> >   a 24-bit IP prefix (written as SN1/24 in the future), and a subnet
> >   sitting in the WAN is described below.  NVE2, NVE3, DGW1, and DGW2
> >   are running BGP EVPN.  TS2 and TS3 do not participate in dynamic
> >   routing protocols, and they only have a static route to forward the
> >   traffic to the WAN.  SN1/24 is dual-homed to NVE2 and NVE3.
> >
> > Corrected Text
> > --------------
> >   An example of inter-subnet forwarding between subnet SN1, which uses
> >   a 24-bit IP prefix (written as SN1 in the figure), and a subnet
> >   sitting in the WAN is described below.  NVE2, NVE3, DGW1, and DGW2
> >   are running BGP EVPN.  TS2 and TS3 do not participate in dynamic
> >   routing protocols, and they only have a static route to forward the
> >   traffic to the WAN.  SN1/24 is dual-homed to NVE2 and NVE3.
> >
> > Notes
> > -----
> > There are two editor issues in the original "(written as SN1/24 in the
> future)".
> > "future" should be "figure".
> > "SN1/24" should be "SN1".
> >
> > I am reporting these two minor ones mainly because the second one was
> causing me some trouble when I was trying to locate SN1 in the figure - the
> search just could not find "SN1/24".
> >
> > Instructions:
> > -------------
> > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is spam, it
> > will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please
> > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
> > will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > RFC9136 (draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-11)
> > --------------------------------------
> > Title               : IP Prefix Advertisement in Ethernet VPN (EVPN)
> > Publication Date    : October 2021
> > Author(s)           : J. Rabadan, Ed., W. Henderickx, J. Drake, W. Lin,
> A. Sajassi
> > Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> > Source              : BGP Enabled ServiceS
> > Stream              : IETF
> > Verifying Party     : IESG
>
> _______________________________________________
> BESS mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to