[irrtoolset]Syntax errors in inet-rtr

On 2004-11-05 17:40:30 -0500, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
> In message <1099689004.9710.41.camel at zen>
> Cengiz Alaettinoglu writes:
> >  
> > Good idea. I have a list already. If someone volunteers, I will pass my
> > list...
> 
> The errata was intended for typos and what would normally be
> considered minor editorial changes that don't change the meaning of
> the RFC.  If you want to make changes you still need a new RFC.

Right.  Still, I guess there are minor editorial changes that can
go into errata.  Let's review what we have now, find out which
of them can go into errata...

Cengiz, I can volunteer for that...
-engin

 
> Curtis
> 
> 
> > On Fri, 2004-11-05 at 21:14 +0100, Engin Gunduz wrote:
> > > On 2004-11-05 13:44:06 -0500, Larry J. Blunk wrote:
> > > > On Friday 05 November 2004 13:05, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
> > > > > Trying to reference a peering-set in an inet-rtr:
> > > > >
> > > > > inet-rtr:   router1.example.com
> > > > > descr:      AS1234 Example Company
> > > > > alias:      r1.example.com
> > > > > local-as:   AS1234
> > > > > ifaddr:     198.32.245.52 masklen 24
> > > > > peer:       BGP4 prng-example asno(PeerAS)
> > > > > tech-c:     See MAINT-AS1234
> > > > > mnt-by:     MAINT-AS1234
> > > > > changed:    noc at example.com 20041105
> > > > > source:     INTERNAL
> > > > >
> > > > > When I submit it, I get a message back complaining of a syntax error:
> > > > >
> > > > > UPDATE FAILED: [inet-rtr] router1.example.com
> > > > > inet-rtr:   router1.example.com
> > > > > descr:      AS1234 Example Company
> > > > > alias:      r1.example.com
> > > > > local-as:   AS1234
> > > > > ifaddr:     198.32.245.52 masklen 24
> > > > > peer:       BGP4 prng-example asno(PeerAS)<?>
> > > > > tech-c:     See MAINT-AS1234
> > > > > mnt-by:     MAINT-AS1234
> > > > > changed:    noc at example.com 20041105
> > > > > source:     INTERNAL
> > > > > #ERROR: 6: peer: Syntax error
> > > > >
> > > > > All the material I've read indicates that this syntax should work.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any ideas?
> > > > 
> > > >     Your syntax is okay, it's a problem with the syntax checker
> > > > in IRRd (actually, the bug is in the RFC2622 dictionary definition --
> > > 
> > > Now that we can have errata for RFCs (http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.html),
> > > how about preparing one for RPSL RFCs?
> > > -engin
> > > 
> > > > I can blame it on Cengiz :-).  I'll try to get out a fixed release soon.
> > > > 
> > > >  -Larry Blunk
> > > >   Merit
> > -- 
> > Cengiz Alaettinoglu <cengiz at packetdesign.com>
>  

-- 
Engin Gunduz
RIPE NCC Software Engineering Department