[IPFIX]Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7011 (8313)

[Mahesh Jethanandani <[e-mail]>]

Hi Madison,

The Errata has been processed. Thanks for the reminder.

Cheers.

> On Mar 12, 2025, at 7:10 AM, Madison Church <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Mahesh,
> 
> Thank you for reviewing this errata report. Because it is Technical rather than Editorial, either you or Warren can mark it as “Held for Document Update”. If you would like us to do this, please let us know.
> 
> Thank you!
> RFC Editor/mc
> 
>> On Mar 7, 2025, at 4:46 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Madison,
>> 
>> Marking the errata as “Technical” is correct. 
>> 
>> After reading through the e-mail thread, I believe the report should be marked “Held for Document Update.”
>> 
>> Cheers.
>> 
>>> On Mar 7, 2025, at 2:11 PM, Madison Church <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Mahesh and Warren,
>>> 
>>> We are unable to verify this erratum that the submitter marked as editorial, so we changed the Type to “Technical”. As Stream Approvers, please review and set the Status and Type accordingly (see the definitions at https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata-definitions/) Please note that this document comes from the IP Flow Information Export (ipfix) working group, which is now concluded.
>>> 
>>> You may review the report at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8313
>>> 
>>> Information on how to verify errata reports can be found at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8313
>>> 
>>> Further information on errata can be found at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.php. 
>>> 
>>> Please see discussion of this errata report at: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipfix/JIQ3AVZKsxiQgCZn7SmYS8YPrcw/.
>>> 
>>> Thank you, 
>>> RFC Editor/mc
>>> 
>>>> On Feb 25, 2025, at 7:13 AM, RFC Errata System <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7011,
>>>> "Specification of the IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Protocol for the Exchange of Flow Information".
>>>> 
>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>> You may review the report below and at:
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8313
>>>> 
>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>> Type: Editorial
>>>> Reported by: Mohamed Boucadair <[e-mail]>
>>>> 
>>>> Section: 3.2
>>>> 
>>>> Original Text
>>>> -------------
>>>> E
>>>> 
>>>>    Enterprise bit.  This is the first bit of the Field Specifier.  If
>>>>    this bit is zero, the Information Element identifier identifies an
>>>>    Information Element in [IANA-IPFIX], and the four-octet Enterprise
>>>>    Number field MUST NOT be present.  If this bit is one, the
>>>>    Information Element identifier identifies an enterprise-specific
>>>>    Information Element, and the Enterprise Number field MUST be
>>>>    present.
>>>> 
>>>> Information Element identifier
>>>> 
>>>>    A numeric value that represents the Information Element.  Refer to
>>>>    [IANA-IPFIX].
>>>> 
>>>> Corrected Text
>>>> --------------
>>>> E
>>>> 
>>>>    Enterprise bit.  This is the first bit of the Field Specifier.  If
>>>>    this bit is zero, the Information Element identifier identifies an
>>>>    Information Element in [IANA-IPFIX], and the four-octet Enterprise
>>>>    Number field MUST NOT be present.  If this bit is one, the
>>>>    Information Element identifier identifies an enterprise-specific
>>>>    Information Element, and the Enterprise Number field MUST be
>>>>    present.
>>>> 
>>>> Information Element identifier
>>>> 
>>>>    A numeric value that represents the Information Element. This field
>>>>    takes a value in [IANA-IPFIX] when the E bit is set to zero.
>>>> 
>>>> Notes
>>>> -----
>>>> Makes it explicit that the values in [IANA-IPFIX] only applies when the is E-bit is unset. 
>>>> 
>>>> An alternative would be to simply delete "Refer to [IANA-IPFIX]." as the exact behavior is already mentioned under the E bit description.
>>>> 
>>>> Instructions:
>>>> -------------
>>>> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is spam, it 
>>>> will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please
>>>> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
>>>> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
>>>> will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>>>> 
>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>> RFC7011 (draft-ietf-ipfix-protocol-rfc5101bis-10)
>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>> Title               : Specification of the IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Protocol for the Exchange of Flow Information
>>>> Publication Date    : September 2013
>>>> Author(s)           : B. Claise, Ed., B. Trammell, Ed., P. Aitken
>>>> Category            : INTERNET STANDARD
>>>> Source              : IP Flow Information Export
>>>> Stream              : IETF
>>>> Verifying Party     : IESG
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Mahesh Jethanandani
>> [e-mail]
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 


Mahesh Jethanandani
[e-mail]