[IPFIX] [Errata Verified] RFC5102 (4984)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Thu, 27 July 2017 13:29 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 254B1131C8E; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 06:29:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.202
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, 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 E73nztsXiVrX; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 06:29:43 -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 9F4FC131C8B; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 06:29:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id EC77EB80DE5; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 06:29:32 -0700 (PDT)
To: pjaitken@brocade.com, quittek@netlab.nec.de, stbryant@cisco.com, bclaise@cisco.com, paitken@cisco.com, jemeyer@paypal.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: bclaise@cisco.com, iesg@ietf.org, ipfix@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <20170727132932.EC77EB80DE5@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 06:29:32 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipfix/faYfUTsEwXfA1_0CpAgsaURTSJ0>
Subject: [IPFIX] [Errata Verified] RFC5102 (4984)
X-BeenThere: ipfix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 13:29:45 -0000

The following errata report has been verified for RFC5102,
"Information Model for IP Flow Information Export". 

You may review the report below and at:

Status: Verified
Type: Technical

Reported by: Paul Aitken <pjaitken@brocade.com>
Date Reported: 2017-03-30
Verified by: Benoit Claise (IESG)

Section: 5.2.10, appA

Original Text
Each bit represents an Information Element in the Data Record 
with the n-th bit
representing the n-th Information Element.

Corrected Text
Each bit represents an Information Element in the Data Record,
with the n-th least significant bit
representing the n-th Information Element.

A misunderstand arose as to whether bits were assigned in host order or network order - so clarify that the bits are assigned from the least significant to the most significant, ie right-to-left rather than left-to-right.

Moreover, this clarification applies to IANA's IPFIX registry.

NB RFC 8038 re-uses this definition for mibIndexIndicator. Consistency between the definitions is desirable.

RFC5102 (draft-ietf-ipfix-info-15)
Title               : Information Model for IP Flow Information Export
Publication Date    : January 2008
Author(s)           : J. Quittek, S. Bryant, B. Claise, P. Aitken, J. Meyer
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : IP Flow Information Export
Area                : Operations and Management
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG