[Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (4887)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Tue, 13 December 2016 20:09 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
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 6F38512968E for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 12:09:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -107.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 x4N2yQ3LFzFJ for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 12:09:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 092B1129574 for <dime@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 12:09:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id E8146B80BF0; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 12:09:45 -0800 (PST)
To: vf0213@gmail.com, jari.arkko@ericsson.com, john.loughney@nokia.com, glenzorn@gmail.com, bclaise@cisco.com, joelja@bogus.com, jouni.nospam@gmail.com, lionel.morand@orange.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20161213200945.E8146B80BF0@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 12:09:45 -0800 (PST)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/rsMtw-EfBo5z_ld17OOQNCtp2_A>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 12:12:28 -0800
Cc: dime@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (4887)
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 20:09:47 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6733,
"Diameter Base Protocol".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6733&eid=4887

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Mikhail Zaytsev <misha.zaytsev.rus@gmail.com>

Section: 6.2

Original Text
-------------
 When a request is locally processed, the following procedures MUST be
   applied to create the associated answer, in addition to any
   additional procedures that MAY be discussed in the Diameter
   application defining the command:

   o  The same Hop-by-Hop Identifier in the request is used in the
      answer.

   o  The local host's identity is encoded in the Origin-Host AVP.

   o  The Destination-Host and Destination-Realm AVPs MUST NOT be
      present in the answer message.


Corrected Text
--------------
 When a request is locally processed, the following procedures MUST be
   applied to create the associated answer, in addition to any
   additional procedures that MAY be discussed in the Diameter
   application defining the command:

   o  The same Hop-by-Hop Identifier in the request is used in the
      answer.

   o  The local host's identity is encoded in the Origin-Host AVP.

   o  The local realm's identity is encoded in the Origin-Realm AVP.

   o  The Destination-Host and Destination-Realm AVPs MUST NOT be
      present in the answer message.

Notes
-----
Unlike Origin-Host AVP, it is not stated explicitly that Origin-Realm AVP MUST be encoded in the associated answer. While both these AVPs MUST be present in all Diameter messages according to their descriptions.

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  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC6733 (draft-ietf-dime-rfc3588bis-33)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Diameter Base Protocol
Publication Date    : October 2012
Author(s)           : V. Fajardo, Ed., J. Arkko, J. Loughney, G. Zorn, Ed.
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Diameter Maintenance and Extensions
Area                : Operations and Management
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG