[IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (3852)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 30 December 2013 15:13 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AF051AE18E for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Dec 2013 07:13:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.26
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.26 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 Lc5jRtzz2EXX for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Dec 2013 07:13:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2607:f170:8000:1500::d3]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F03451AE01F for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Dec 2013 07:13:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 29E9F7FC393; Mon, 30 Dec 2013 07:13:31 -0800 (PST)
To: bclaise@cisco.com, trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch, bclaise@cisco.com, joelja@bogus.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, quittek@neclab.eu
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20131230151331.29E9F7FC393@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2013 07:13:31 -0800
Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, ipfix@ietf.org
Subject: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (3852)
X-BeenThere: ipfix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPFIX WG discussion list <ipfix.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipfix>, <mailto:ipfix-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipfix/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipfix@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipfix-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix>, <mailto:ipfix-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2013 15:13:40 -0000
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7012, "Information Model for IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7012&eid=3852 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com> Section: 3.1.15-17 Original Text ------------- 3.1.15. dateTimeSeconds The type "dateTimeSeconds" represents a time value expressed with second-level precision. 3.1.16. dateTimeMilliseconds The type "dateTimeMilliseconds" represents a time value expressed with millisecond-level precision. 3.1.17. dateTimeMicroseconds The type "dateTimeMicroseconds" represents a time value expressed with microsecond-level precision. 3.1.18. dateTimeNanoseconds The type "dateTimeNanoseconds" represents a time value expressed with nanosecond-level precision. Corrected Text -------------- 3.1.15. dateTimeSeconds The type "dateTimeSeconds" represents a time value in units of seconds based on coordinated universal time (UTC). The choice of an epoch, for example, 00:00 UTC, January 1, 1970, is left to corresponding encoding specifications for this type, for example, the IPFIX protocol specification. Leap seconds are excluded. Note that transformation of values might be required between different encodings if different epoch values are used. 3.1.16. dateTimeMilliseconds The type "dateTimeMilliseconds" represents a time value in units of milliseconds based on coordinated universal time (UTC). The choice of an epoch, for example, 00:00 UTC, January 1, 1970, is left to corresponding encoding specifications for this type, for example, the IPFIX protocol specification. Leap seconds are excluded. Note that transformation of values might be required between different encodings if different epoch values are used. 3.1.17. dateTimeMicroseconds The type "dateTimeMicroseconds" represents a time value in units of microseconds based on coordinated universal time (UTC). The choice of an epoch, for example, 00:00 UTC, January 1, 1970, is left to corresponding encoding specifications for this type, for example, the IPFIX protocol specification. Leap seconds are excluded. Note that transformation of values might be required between different encodings if different epoch values are used. 3.1.18. dateTimeNanoseconds The type "dateTimeNanoseconds" represents a time value in units of nanoseconds based on coordinated universal time (UTC). The choice of an epoch, for example, 00:00 UTC, January 1, 1970, is left to corresponding encoding specifications for this type, for example, the IPFIX protocol specification. Leap seconds are excluded. Note that transformation of values might be required between different encodings if different epoch values are used. Notes ----- Although section 1.1 says : - "Definitions of timestamp data types have been clarified." The edited text has removed the epoch definition, and this does not seem to have been incorporated elsewhere in the RFC. Without a specified epoch, there is no unique definition of the timestamps. My proposal above is to revert to the RFC5102 definitions. RFC7102 is intended to be backwards compatible with RFC5102 and thus the definitions need to be technically identical. Alternatively, if the text is now included elsewhere in RFC7012 or in another RFC, it would be helpful to the reader to provide a reference to the epoch definition in an editorial update to dateTimeX definitions in RFC7102. 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. -------------------------------------- RFC7012 (draft-ietf-ipfix-information-model-rfc5102bis-10) -------------------------------------- Title : Information Model for IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Publication Date : September 2013 Author(s) : B. Claise, Ed., B. Trammell, Ed. Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : IP Flow Information Export Area : Operations and Management Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (3852) RFC Errata System
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Andrew Feren
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Paul Aitken
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Stewart Bryant (stbryant)
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Benoit Claise
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Brian Trammell
- Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7012 (… Brian Trammell
- [IPFIX] [Errata Rejected] RFC7012 (3852) RFC Errata System