[Adding OPSAWG and NETMOD] Thanks, Madison.
Does anyone disagree with marking this Errata as Verified? Cheers. > On Feb 9, 2026, at 12:27 PM, Madison Church <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Med and Mahesh, > > 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/eid8714. > > 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, > > Madison Church > RFC Production Center > >> On Jan 22, 2026, at 9:25 PM, RFC Errata System <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC4363, >> "Definitions of Managed Objects for Bridges with Traffic Classes, Multicast >> Filtering, and Virtual LAN Extensions". >> >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8714 >> >> -------------------------------------- >> Type: Editorial >> Reported by: Ramakrishna DTV <[email protected]> >> >> Section: 5 >> >> Original Text >> ------------- >> mgmt(5) - the value of the corresponding instance of >> dot1qTpFdbAddress is also the value of an >> existing instance of dot1qStaticAddress." >> >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> mgmt(5) - the value of the corresponding instance of >> dot1qTpFdbAddress is also the value of an >> existing instance of dot1qStaticUnicastAddress." >> >> Notes >> ----- >> The RFC says for dot1qTpFdbStatus: >> >> mgmt(5) - the value of the corresponding instance of >> dot1qTpFdbAddress is also the value of an >> existing instance of dot1qStaticAddress." >> >> It is referring to dot1qStaticAddress. But there is no such object. Instead, >> it >> should refer to 'dot1qStaticUnicastAddress'. >> >> 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. >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC4363 (draft-ietf-bridge-ext-v2-07) >> -------------------------------------- >> Title : Definitions of Managed Objects for Bridges with >> Traffic Classes, Multicast Filtering, and Virtual LAN Extensions >> Publication Date : January 2006 >> Author(s) : D. Levi, D. Harrington >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >> Source : Bridge MIB >> Stream : IETF >> Verifying Party : IESG > Mahesh Jethanandani [email protected]
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
