[dhcwg] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6704 (3353)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Fri, 14 September 2012 17:03 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0E9521F850D for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 10:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.393
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.393 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.207, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LtLehjhuJhin for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 10:03:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CF6921F852C for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 10:03:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 1E5CAB1E002; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 10:00:23 -0700 (PDT)
To: davidmiles@google.com, wdec@cisco.com, James.Bristow@swisscom.com, roberta.maglione@telecomitalia.it, rdroms.ietf@gmail.com, brian@innovationslab.net, ted.lemon@nominum.com, john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20120914170024.1E5CAB1E002@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 10:00:23 -0700
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 10:09:48 -0700
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: [dhcwg] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6704 (3353)
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 17:03:46 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6704,
"Forcerenew Nonce Authentication".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6704&eid=3353

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Gaurav Halwasia <ghalwasi@cisco.com>

Section: 5.1

Original Text
-------------
   The mechanism described in this document is vulnerable to a denial-
   of-service (DoS) attack through flooding a client with bogus
   FORCERENEW messages.  The calculations involved in authenticating the
   bogus FORECERENEW messages may overwhelm the device on which the
   client is running.


Corrected Text
--------------
   The mechanism described in this document is vulnerable to a denial-
   of-service (DoS) attack through flooding a client with bogus
   FORCERENEW messages.  The calculations involved in authenticating the
   bogus FORCERENEW messages may overwhelm the device on which the
   client is running.


Notes
-----
Spelling of "FORECERENEW" is incorrect. It should be "FORCERENEW"

Instructions:
-------------
This errata 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. 

--------------------------------------
RFC6704 (draft-ietf-dhc-forcerenew-nonce-07)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Forcerenew Nonce Authentication
Publication Date    : August 2012
Author(s)           : D. Miles, W. Dec, J. Bristow, R. Maglione
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Dynamic Host Configuration
Area                : Internet
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG