IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPFIX] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5610 (4731)

Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch> Wed, 06 July 2016 06:27 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@trammell.ch>
X-Original-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6F3612D59D for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 23:27:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.328
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.328 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 8Km3DD06UAlm for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 23:27:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from trammell.ch (trammell.ch [5.148.172.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ECBF12D544 for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 23:27:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:26:9c2::7ea] (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:26:9c2::7ea]) by trammell.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3E1071A03B4; Wed, 6 Jul 2016 08:27:30 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_56AF7DF4-E770-44F8-9F5E-ED31067F50D1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.6b2
From: Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch>
In-Reply-To: <20160706062440.C723CB80E00@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 08:27:32 +0200
Message-Id: <F01C76E8-D82D-4D07-9C62-080A7E431DFD@trammell.ch>
References: <20160706062440.C723CB80E00@rfc-editor.org>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipfix/i30s9KOflrSwkJg6fdX07NVzuaY>
Cc: "ipfix@ietf.org Group" <ipfix@ietf.org>, sb.logarajan@gmail.com, Joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>, Nevil Brownlee <n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz>
Subject: Re: [IPFIX] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5610 (4731)
X-BeenThere: ipfix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 06 Jul 2016 06:27:34 -0000

(removing emails I know to be no longer functional)

> On 06 Jul 2016, at 08:24, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5610,
> "Exporting Type Information for IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Information Elements".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5610&eid=4731
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Logarajan <sb.logarajan@gmail.com>
> 
> Section: Appendix A
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
>                     1                   2                   3
>    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |          Set ID = 3           |          Length =  26         |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |      Template ID = 257        |        Field Count = 4        |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |    Scope Field Count = 2      |0| priv.EnterpriseNumber   346 |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |       Field Length = 4        |0| informationElementId    303 |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |       Field Length = 2        |0| inf.El.DataType         339 |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |       Field Length = 1        |0| inf.El.Semantics        344 |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |       Field Length = 1        |0| inf.El.Name             341 |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |     Field Length = 65536      |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>                     1                   2                   3
>    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |          Set ID = 3           |          Length =  26         |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |      Template ID = 257        |        Field Count = 5        |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |    Scope Field Count = 2      |0| priv.EnterpriseNumber   346 |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |       Field Length = 4        |0| informationElementId    303 |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |       Field Length = 2        |0| inf.El.DataType         339 |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |       Field Length = 1        |0| inf.El.Semantics        344 |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |       Field Length = 1        |0| inf.El.Name             341 |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |     Field Length = 65536      |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> 
> Notes
> -----
> Field count should be 5.
> 
> 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.

Yes, this is correct.

Also, Length = 26 should be Length = 30, since the length is consistent with the field count. (Do we need to file a new erratum for this?)

Cheers,

Brian

> --------------------------------------
> RFC5610 (draft-ietf-ipfix-exporting-type-05)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Exporting Type Information for IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Information Elements
> Publication Date    : July 2009
> Author(s)           : E. Boschi, B. Trammell, L. Mark, T. Zseby
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : IP Flow Information Export
> Area                : Operations and Management
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IPFIX mailing list
> IPFIX@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email