IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6793 (4538)

"Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com> Thu, 19 November 2015 22:51 UTC

Return-Path: <aretana@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59A191B36BB for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 14:51:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.086
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.086 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=-0.585, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 tTT3eO9ER9xA for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 14:51:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D7451B36BE for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 14:51:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2604; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1447973493; x=1449183093; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=3MVLWXrzu/VpUTgDvql0fIK684u46GzPA7CNH4jXmIY=; b=UGynlwG8HsYCYngcyhTtmfGGMpTmGnKuVqXgOT5B1MpFltOO0EqfXzvZ FmYCkkSrRDC1ONQAt4YQqIIjD3F1xO+J8m/xCNLYomX/bLFuQeNgP0KWe j7JzV2HKq33bU+5Mn3xChdg/UNbQ/mC0JG0ocdxFg0Qdvg3l33b/nPcND Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0ANAgDaUU5W/5pdJa1EGoM7U28GvngBDYFlIYVuAoFSOBQBAQEBAQEBgQqENQEBBDo/EAIBCDYQMiUCBAENBYguDTu/YAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARiGVAGEfYFAgl+FGgEEh0YKhwCEGoNiAY0tgVuEQIMlkwYBHwEBQoIRDRCBVnIBE4QFgQcBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,319,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="209453848"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Nov 2015 22:51:32 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (xch-aln-003.cisco.com [173.36.7.13]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tAJMpW0V003867 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 19 Nov 2015 22:51:32 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-002.cisco.com (173.36.7.12) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 16:51:31 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-002.cisco.com ([173.36.7.12]) by XCH-ALN-002.cisco.com ([173.36.7.12]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 16:51:31 -0600
From: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, "quaizar.vohra@gmail.com" <quaizar.vohra@gmail.com>, "Enke Chen (enkechen)" <enkechen@cisco.com>, "akatlas@gmail.com" <akatlas@gmail.com>, "db3546@att.com" <db3546@att.com>, "shares@ndzh.com" <shares@ndzh.com>, "jgs@juniper.net" <jgs@juniper.net>
Thread-Topic: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6793 (4538)
Thread-Index: AQHRItU/nj8/uPdDV0C7Y8rmpyEu8J6kBL0A
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 22:51:31 +0000
Message-ID: <D273BBB7.EB02D%aretana@cisco.com>
References: <20151119141728.94362180009@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20151119141728.94362180009@rfc-editor.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.117.15.3]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <4613A8BB68DB7847B8EBC4139342F625@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/9Z6gRNjhvz3MM9FYD6RZllNQiLk>
Cc: "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6793 (4538)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 22:51:35 -0000

Hi!

I wonder if the authors meant draft-ietf-idr-bgp4-mibv2 (instead of
rfc4273), which does use InetAutonomousSystemNumber.  If so, then that
would be the errata.   Enke/Quaizar?

Of course, the MIBv2 has been stuck without implementations for a while
(??).  Sue/John: can you please confirm?

Thanks!

Alvaro.

On 11/19/15, 9:17 AM, "RFC Errata System" <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
wrote:

>The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6793,
>"BGP Support for Four-Octet Autonomous System (AS) Number Space".
>
>--------------------------------------
>You may review the report below and at:
>http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6793&eid=4538
>
>--------------------------------------
>Type: Technical
>Reported by: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
>
>Section: 8
>
>Original Text
>-------------
>If the BGP4-MIB [RFC4273] is supported, there are no additional
>manageability concerns that arise from the use of four-octet AS
>numbers, since the InetAutonomousSystemNumber textual convention
>[RFC4001] is defined as Unsigned32.
>
>Corrected Text
>--------------
>
>
>Notes
>-----
>I do not have corrected text. RFC4273 does not use
>InetAutonomousSystemNumber for AS numbers:
>bgpPeerRemoteAs OBJECT-TYPE
>            SYNTAX     Integer32 (0..65535)
>            MAX-ACCESS read-only
>            STATUS     current
>            DESCRIPTION
>                    \\"The remote autonomous system number received in
>                     the BGP OPEN message.\\"
>            REFERENCE
>                    \\"RFC 4271, Section 4.2.\\"
>            ::= { bgpPeerEntry 9 }
>
>This uses \\"Integer32 (0...65535)\\" (note, Integer, not Unsigned Int).
>It is unclear to me how to fix this, I know some folk are simply treating
>it as a UInt32.
>
>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.
>
>--------------------------------------
>RFC6793 (draft-ietf-idr-rfc4893bis-07)
>--------------------------------------
>Title               : BGP Support for Four-Octet Autonomous System (AS)
>Number Space
>Publication Date    : December 2012
>Author(s)           : Q. Vohra, E. Chen
>Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
>Source              : Inter-Domain Routing
>Area                : Routing
>Stream              : IETF
>Verifying Party     : IESG
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email