Re: [Dime] [IANA #1118137] error in IANA allocations for RFC 5447 (attributes 124 and 125)

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Sat, 11 August 2018 16:07 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A973D130DD9; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 09:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 SDAYZ0HeKLGO; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 09:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu [18.9.25.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 558791277C8; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 09:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 1209190f-f1fff7000000159e-9c-5b6f09aba35b
Received: from mailhub-auth-3.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.43]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 0D.30.05534.BA90F6B5; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 12:07:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-3.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id w7BG760f027679; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 12:07:06 -0400
Received: from kduck.kaduk.org (24-107-191-124.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.107.191.124]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id w7BG710w017821 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 11 Aug 2018 12:07:04 -0400
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2018 11:07:01 -0500
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: Amanda Baber via RT <iana-matrix@iana.org>
Cc: ;, radext@ietf.org, lionel.morand@orange.com, dime@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20180811160701.GP40887@kduck.kaduk.org>
References: <RT-Ticket-1118137@icann.org> <1650f1cabeb.100024af647180.2934901912766753218@ovsienko.info> <A54682E8-B80C-4992-877C-218B492882E3@deployingradius.com> <rt-4.4.3-14398-1533587606-1786.1118137-7-0@icann.org> <11227_1533629007_5B69524E_11227_192_1_6B7134B31289DC4FAF731D844122B36E3951AE20@OPEXCLILM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <rt-4.4.3-5784-1533629029-1033.1118137-7-0@icann.org> <rt-4.4.3-9839-1533693570-817.1118137-7-0@icann.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <rt-4.4.3-9839-1533693570-817.1118137-7-0@icann.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrDKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixCmqrbuGMz/a4OwMTou5vSvYLPr2NLBY 3N6eadHyaiabA4tHj7zHkiU/mTxanp1kC2CO4rJJSc3JLEst0rdL4MpYNH8eY8Fb/Yqv766z NDDeVeli5OSQEDCRmPzyLmMXIxeHkMBiJokDh6czgySEBDYySvRPzoRIXGWSuPXsMhtIgkVA VWLxnG4WEJtNQEWiofsyWIOIgJ7EipalTCA2s4C9xNLNp1lBbGGBOIn537exg9i8QNsmrnjN CrHgLLPEq7klEHFBiZMzn7BA9OpI7Nx6B2gXB5AtLbH8HwdEWF6ieetssFWcAo4Sbx98ABsp KqAssbfvEPsERsFZSCbNQjJpFsKkWUgmLWBkWcUom5JbpZubmJlTnJqsW5ycmJeXWqRropeb WaKXmlK6iREc7JL8OxjnNHgfYhTgYFTi4b2wMTdaiDWxrLgy9xCjJAeTkiiv2Ny8aCG+pPyU yozE4oz4otKc1OJDjBIczEoivGffA+V4UxIrq1KL8mFS0hwsSuK892rCo4UE0hNLUrNTUwtS i2CyMhwcShK80zjyo4UEi1LTUyvSMnNKENJMHJwgw3mAhpeB1PAWFyTmFmemQ+RPMdpzvFjU M4mZ48JjEDnv6FQg+ec9kBRiycvPS5US520AaRMAacsozYObDEpkEtn7a14xigM9Ksy7BqSK B5gE4Wa/AlrLBLQ2WzMXZG1JIkJKqoFxmez13xUik276vkhb2Deh6PXet7YuP+MLdBoT5RUs TjEuPrHsvqJgzC4tmTuOCj6/jq2ZdTjD+c8+Jt0d9f4nXvbc36p+YPPBs28lPs1rXr13pauh 6GMNKfFj7jenJnpevBz9+OvnW3vn5dstqi2e+udMZi/PngPpMiwsjPf/SumbJ8/+xZP0RIml OCPRUIu5qDgRABDiffU/AwAA
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/Aruim_gcXu_p9gEDRXKYEfP6Wko>
Subject: Re: [Dime] [IANA #1118137] error in IANA allocations for RFC 5447 (attributes 124 and 125)
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diameter Maintanence and Extentions Working Group <dime.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dime/>
List-Post: <mailto:dime@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2018 16:07:12 -0000

Hi Amanda,

On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 01:59:31AM +0000, Amanda Baber via RT wrote:
> Hi Benjamin,
> 
> Given Lionel's confirmation, should we go ahead and make these changes at https://www.iana.org/assignments/radius-types?

Yes, please make those changes.

Thanks,

Benjamin

> OLD:
> 
> 124	MIP6-Feature-Vector	string	[RFC5447]
> 125	MIP6-Home-Link-Prefix	ipv6prefix	[RFC5447]
> 
> NEW:
> 
> 124     MIP6-Feature-Vector     integer64       [RFC5447]
> 125     MIP6-Home-Link-Prefix   string  [RFC5447]
> 
> thanks,
> Amanda
> 
> On Tue Aug 07 08:03:49 2018, lionel.morand@orange.com wrote:
> > I agree with the proposal.
> > It is important that the types defined in RFC5447 are the ones listed
> > in the IANA registry.
> > For information, there are existing implementations relying on these
> > AVPs and it is important to be consistent between the RFC and
> > registry.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Lionel
> > 
> > > -----Message d'origine-----
> > > De : radext [mailto:radext-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Amanda
> > > Baber via
> > > RT
> > > Envoyé : lundi 6 août 2018 22:33
> > > Cc : radext@ietf.org; dime@ietf.org; kaduk@mit.edu
> > > Objet : [radext] [IANA #1118137] error in IANA allocations for RFC
> > > 5447
> > > (attributes 124 and 125)
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Mon Aug 06 13:00:05 2018, aland@deployingradius.com wrote:
> > > > On Aug 6, 2018, at 8:01 AM, Denis Ovsienko <denis@ovsienko.info>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Recently I was reviewing some code that adds support for two RFC
> > > > > 5447
> > > > > RADIUS AVPs below:
> > > > >
> > > > > The MIP6-Home-Link-Prefix AVP (AVP Code 125) is of type
> > > > > OctetString
> > > > > The MIP6-Feature-Vector AVP (AVP Code 124) is of type Unsigned64
> > > > > and
> > > > >
> > > > > It turned out, the current RADIUS Types registry at
> > > > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/radius-types/radius-types.xhtml
> > > > > lists both attributes with wrong types:
> > > > >
> > > > > 125   MIP6-Home-Link-Prefix   ipv6prefix      [RFC5447]
> > > >
> > > > That is definitely wrong.  The "ipv6prefix" format is different
> > > > than
> > > > the one used by MIP6-Home-Link-Prefix in RFC 5337.
> > > >
> > > > > 124   MIP6-Feature-Vector     string  [RFC5447]
> > > >
> > > > That issue is a bit different.  64-bit integers were defined in RFC
> > > > 6929 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6929#section-2.5) long after
> > > > RFC
> > > > 5447 was published.
> > > >
> > > > So at the time RFC 5447 was published, "string" was the correct
> > > > definition.
> > > >
> > > > > Those incorrect types had propagated from the IANA registry into
> > > > > FreeRADIUS and Wireshark (both have been fixed now for MIP6-Home-
> > > > > Link-Prefix, see the discussion and the follow-ups at
> > > > > https://github.com/the-tcpdump-group/tcpdump/pull/636 if
> > > > > interested).
> > > > >
> > > > > Having studied this discrepancy thoroughly, I had concluded the
> > > > > AVP
> > > > > definitions are correct in RFC 5447, so I did not file an
> > > > > erratum.
> > > > > The problem seems to be with those IANA allocations only. Could
> > > > > somebody review this issue and put the IANA allocations right?
> > > >
> > > > In the end, I think that the incorrect IANA allocations were a
> > > > result
> > > > of the updates done in RFC 8044.  The early drafts had a table
> > > > which
> > > > updated all of the IANA data types, e.g.:
> > > >
> > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-radext-datatypes-05#section-
> > > > 4.2
> > >
> > > Right, we took the entries from here when the document was approved:
> > >
> > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-radext-datatypes-08#section-
> > > 4.2
> > >
> > > > The MIP6 attributes are listed there as "ipv6prefix" and "string".
> > > > As
> > > > the author of RFC 8044, I think that's my mistake.  Updating
> > > > hundreds
> > > > of attributes required reading many RFCs, and it's understandable
> > > > that
> > > > a few mistakes were made.
> > > >
> > > > Unless there are objections from DIME or RADEXT, I think it would
> > > > be
> > > > best for IANA to update the registry as follows:
> > > >
> > > > 125     MIP6-Home-Link-Prefix   string  [RFC5447]
> > > > 124     MIP6-Feature-Vector     integer64       [RFC5447]
> > > >
> > > > We may need approval from the AD (Ben).  Explicit consensus from
> > > > the
> > > > WG would also be helpful.
> > > >
> > > > Alan DeKok.
> > >
> > > If there's no errata report required, we can move ahead once the AD
> > > lets us
> > > know that any appropriate consensus has been reached (if we haven't
> > > heard
> > > from the chairs first) and gives us the go-ahead.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Amanda Baber
> > > Lead IANA Services Specialist
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > radext mailing list
> > > radext@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext
> > 
> > _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> > 
> > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
> > confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> > pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez
> > recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> > a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les
> > messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> > Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere,
> > deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
> > 
> > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or
> > privileged information that may be protected by law;
> > they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> > If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and
> > delete this message and its attachments.
> > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have
> > been modified, changed or falsified.
> > Thank you.
>