Re: [BEHAVE] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6145 (4090)

"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Wed, 20 August 2014 17:57 UTC

Return-Path: <fred@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86BC91A04BA for <behave@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 10:57:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -115.169
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-115.169 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ST4yQLzRlfyc for <behave@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 10:57:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C09F01A04DC for <behave@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 10:57:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3771; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1408557470; x=1409767070; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=fBadP2awjCoxRYPzKc6/cXq5j2uMM+dvaeVcMow21nA=; b=VOhIxKkTMs+CCgzDzy3JTooJrcTpbjSXQaa0tyokHZRcCCc7mwzFlm3o 5lTP5pS9TiRW+pvsg+XHEjwONA5QitFI+iM2T36TZobrOwe/ldVT0fS4p yY2ifJMZrpmef4p+OAalR18lwYhl1OX50B6QMDEwipQuKjGMqiyY4Vby+ M=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 195
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjsFAEjh9FOtJV2Q/2dsb2JhbAA/GoMNU1cEzEmHWQGBERZ3hAQBAQMBbgsFCwIBCEYyJQIEDgUOiCwIDTbCLReMHYMvB4MvgR0FhhGLFIIAgUqHVZUKg11sAROBNIEHAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,903,1400025600"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="70931575"
Received: from rcdn-core-8.cisco.com ([173.37.93.144]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Aug 2014 17:57:49 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x04.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x04.cisco.com [173.37.183.78]) by rcdn-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7KHvn3n017025 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 20 Aug 2014 17:57:49 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.15]) by xhc-rcd-x04.cisco.com ([fe80::200:5efe:173.37.183.34%12]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 12:57:48 -0500
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Thread-Topic: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6145 (4090)
Thread-Index: AQHPvKBA040WgFAimkOLcvxClOnWdA==
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 17:57:48 +0000
Message-ID: <4F4DE3BD-A7E4-46F0-9088-BEAE54D6B5AF@cisco.com>
References: <20140820164853.A041E180480@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140820164853.A041E180480@rfc-editor.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.19.64.114]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_012AA932-1CA7-47CA-B4FD-EDF1F76FCEED"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/behave/9NFXEs-wnF3w_NG_exykZFSMrpg
Cc: Congxiao Bao <congxiao@cernet.edu.cn>, "behave@ietf.org" <behave@ietf.org>, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>, "mls.ietf@gmail.com" <mls.ietf@gmail.com>, Xing Li <xing@cernet.edu.cn>, "spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com" <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, "Dan Wing (dwing)" <dwing@cisco.com>, "fgont@si6networks.com" <fgont@si6networks.com>
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6145 (4090)
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/behave/>
List-Post: <mailto:behave@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 17:57:52 -0000

I think I understand where Fernando is going with this. I have two comments.

(1) Considering the sentence he proposes to change to be "in error" presumes that draft-gont-6man-deprecate-atomfrag-generation has been ratified. It has just been posted yesterday, and has had only preliminary mailing list discussion in 6man. I think Fernando may have a reasonable instinct here, but is ahead of himself. I would recommend "verifying" the erratum when the draft is approved.

(2) If we're going to "correct" the text, we need to correct the text. It is either "an ICMPv4 Packet Too Big message" (singular), in which case the verb form is "is", or *they* are "ICMPv4 Packet Too Big messages" (plural), in which case the verb form is is "are". Since the RFC describes how to translate a single packet (which would be the word RFC 2460 would prefer, not "message") from IPv4 to IPv6 or IPv6 to IPv4, I would prefer the singular form.

On Aug 20, 2014, at 9:48 AM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:

> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6145,
> "IP/ICMP Translation Algorithm".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6145&eid=4090
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
> 
> Section: 6
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
>   1.  In the IPv4-to-IPv6 direction: if the MTU value of ICMPv4 Packet
>       Too Big (PTB) messages is less than 1280, change it to 1280.
>       This is intended to cause the IPv6 host and IPv6 firewall to
>       process the ICMP PTB message and generate subsequent packets to
>       this destination with an IPv6 Fragment Header.
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>   1.  In the IPv4-to-IPv6 direction: if the MTU value of ICMPv4 Packet
>       Too Big (PTB) messages is less than 1280, change it to 1280.
>       This is intended to cause the IPv6 host and IPv6 firewall to
>       process the ICMP PTB message.
> 
> Notes
> -----
> An ICMPv6 PTB message reporting an MTU equal to 1280 does not trigger IPv6 atomic fragments. Only ICMPv6 PTB < 1280 do.
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum 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. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC6145 (draft-ietf-behave-v6v4-xlate-23)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : IP/ICMP Translation Algorithm
> Publication Date    : April 2011
> Author(s)           : X. Li, C. Bao, F. Baker
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Behavior Engineering for Hindrance Avoidance
> Area                : Transport
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>