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

Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> Mon, 06 August 2018 12:59 UTC

Return-Path: <aland@deployingradius.com>
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 759BC130DDA; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 05:59:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-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 QiwS219vY3WX; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 05:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.networkradius.com (mail.networkradius.com [62.210.147.122]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4A96130DFD; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 05:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.46.58] (198-84-237-221.cpe.teksavvy.com [198.84.237.221]) by mail.networkradius.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9E8C32C6; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 12:59:41 +0000 (UTC)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
X-Priority: Medium
In-Reply-To: <1650f1cabeb.100024af647180.2934901912766753218@ovsienko.info>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 08:59:39 -0400
Cc: dime <dime@ietf.org>, iana <iana@iana.org>, radext@ietf.org, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A54682E8-B80C-4992-877C-218B492882E3@deployingradius.com>
References: <1650f1cabeb.100024af647180.2934901912766753218@ovsienko.info>
To: Denis Ovsienko <denis@ovsienko.info>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/ecQUN6ddTjXQU67SkoMZw7y6W48>
Subject: Re: [Dime] 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: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 12:59:49 -0000

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

  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.