Re: [IPFIX] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5655 (4306)

[Paul Aitken <[e-mail]>]

[-RFC Editor]

I checked the figure and agree with Wayne: the byte should be 0x16 
because there's only one padding octet, not three.

P.


On 19/03/15 18:08, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5655,
> "Specification of the IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) File Format".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5655&eid=4306
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Wayne Tackabury <[e-mail]>
>
> Section: A.5
>
> Original Text
> -------------
>     224: 0A 47 0A B6 E5 47 0C 07 48 00|01 03 00 18 00 3E
>             [ message checksum record ^ -->
>     240: 2B 37 08 CE B2 0E 30 11 32 12 4A 5F E3 AD DB 00
>
>     256:|00 0A 05 10 47 0A B6 E5 00 00 00 06 00 00 00 01
>
>
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>     224: 0A 47 0A B6 E5 47 0C 07 48 00|01 03 00 16 00 3E
>             [ message checksum record ^ -->
>     240: 2B 37 08 CE B2 0E 30 11 32 12 4A 5F E3 AD DB 00
>
>     256:|00 0A 05 10 47 0A B6 E5 00 00 00 06 00 00 00 01
>
>
>
> Notes
> -----
> First of all, note that per erratum #2030, the offsets in this whole section are wrong, it should begin (I think) at 192.  I shall use the published (incorrect) offset for illuminating this point:
>
> I believe the byte at #237 should be 0x16 and not 0x18.  I suspect this checksum was copy-pasted from a prior instance in the example, where there were three pad bytes added to the data record for #259 (0x103).    In this instance, there is only one pad byte at #255, hence the offset here should be two less (22 or 0x16 and not 24 or 0x18):
>
>    2 bytes set ID
>    2 bytes length
>    1 byte option data
>   16 bytes checksum data
>    1 byte pad (at #255)
>
>   ...totalling 22. Thanks!
>
> 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.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC5655 (draft-ietf-ipfix-file-05)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Specification of the IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) File Format
> Publication Date    : October 2009
> Author(s)           : B. Trammell, E. Boschi, L. Mark, T. Zseby, A. Wagner
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : IP Flow Information Export
> Area                : Operations and Management
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>
> _______________________________________________
> IPFIX mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix