[IPFIX] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7012 (6564)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 28 April 2021 20:16 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A31433A1E94 for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:16:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TZZ_uc9Z9je8 for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:16:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 590953A1EA8 for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:16:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 5BB3EF4075E; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:16:09 -0700 (PDT)
To: bclaise@cisco.com, trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch, warren@kumari.net, rwilton@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, quittek@neclab.eu
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: paul.aitken@att.com, ipfix@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <20210428201609.5BB3EF4075E@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:16:09 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipfix/d-voxx6YbwczLsmWYJEOwX1IP7M>
Subject: [IPFIX] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7012 (6564)
X-BeenThere: ipfix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 20:16:33 -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:

Type: Editorial
Reported by: Paul Aitken <paul.aitken@att.com>

Section: 7.2

Original Text
   The specification
   of new MPLS label types MUST be published using a well-established
   and persistent publication medium.

Corrected Text

This paragraph envisaged that a new RFC be written to specify new label types in the mplsTopLabelType sub-registry.

Since the publication of RFC7012, IANA has added 16 other IPFIX IE sub-registries, none of which have the same requirement. See https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix/ipfix.xhtml

Publication in IANA's IPFIX registry should provide a clear and persistent definition. New IPFIX MPLS label type specifications should not be singled out to require persistent publication of an additional document.

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. 

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