Search RFCs

RFC Editor

Found 2 records.

Status:Verified (1)

RFC 4363, "Definitions of Managed Objects for Bridges with Traffic Classes, Multicast Filtering, and Virtual LAN Extensions", January 2006

Errata ID:8714
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ramakrishna DTV
Date Reported: 2026-01-23
Verifier Name: Mahesh Jethanandani
Date Verified: 2026-02-17

Section 5 says:

            mgmt(5) - the value of the corresponding instance of                dot1qTpFdbAddress is also the value of an                existing instance of dot1qStaticAddress."

It should say:

            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'.

Verifier Notes: No objections received on marking this as Verfiied. See the thread - https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/E5lPDoFUfUH6fWNlIY_YPdfemMo/

Status:Rejected (1)

RFC 4363, "Definitions of Managed Objects for Bridges with Traffic Classes, Multicast Filtering, and Virtual LAN Extensions", January 2006

Errata ID:2680
Status: Rejected
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: *Zhong* Qiyao
Date Reported: 2011-01-04
Rejected by: Ron Bonica
Date Rejected: 2011-01-24

Section MIB says:

> Dear IETF Person-in-Charge,>>      We found that Q-BRIDGE-MIB (RFC 2674) had its content corrected> using the RFC 4363.>>      While this kind of update and grammatical correction is a good> thing,> we found that:>> << old ("which" as correlative pronoun)>        "The number of valid frames received by this port from>        its segment which were classified as belonging to this>        VLAN which were discarded due to VLAN related reasons.>        Specifically, the IEEE 802.1Q counters for Discard>        Inbound and Discard on Ingress Filtering."> >>>> << new ("that" as correlative pronoun)>        "The number of valid frames received by this port from>        its segment that were classified as belonging to this>        VLAN and that were discarded due to VLAN-related reasons.>        Specifically, the IEEE 802.1Q counters for Discard>        Inbound and Discard on Ingress Filtering."> >>>>      According to our education, "which" is correct, and "that" is> only> colloquial.  But Microsoft Word seems to reject the use of "which" in> such> situations, and it may have mis-lead IETF into thinking that the Q-> BRIDGE-MIB> should remove "which" and use "that", which is a pity.>>      Thanks.>>                                        Qiyao #3165 &#37758;&#21855;&#22575;&#12288;&#19978;> --------------------------------------------------------------------------> *Zhong* Qiyao, Xinzhu, Tajvano ~{VSFtR"~}> Greg 2009.12.13-19> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notes:

Many places.
--VERIFIER NOTES--
Please see http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS_FAQ/Whichvs.That/Whichvs.That01.html for details

Ron Bonica

Report New Errata