Re: [ippm] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6038 (5549)
"Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Wed, 28 November 2018 12:47 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D68512D4EF for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 04:47:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 lM78d1AuOCpM for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 04:47:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEB881294D0 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 04:47:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 200116b82c8aff008423b6791577d8ab.dip.versatel-1u1.de ([2001:16b8:2c8a:ff00:8423:b679:1577:d8ab]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1gRzFo-0000A2-DV; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 13:47:44 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: "Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF557DDDB0@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 13:47:42 +0100
Cc: "ippm@ietf.org" <ippm@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0EE1717C-4587-4E1B-8222-AFCD03217FEC@kuehlewind.net>
References: <20181107043043.5854CB80EE3@rfc-editor.org> <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF557DDDB0@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
To: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1543409266;c5b158d7;
X-HE-SMSGID: 1gRzFo-0000A2-DV
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/Tyr1ye1d4olM3W6mt6qv4G9k0zI>
Subject: Re: [ippm] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6038 (5549)
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 12:47:50 -0000
Hi Al, thanks! Actually the one from last year wasn’t marked as verified yet. Verified both errata now! Mirja > Am 09.11.2018 um 17:29 schrieb MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <acm@research.att.com>: > > It looks like this Errata should be verified. > > A similar point was verified in RFC 5357 (last year): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5046 > > Al > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: RFC Errata System [mailto:rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 11:31 PM >> To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <acm@research.att.com>; CIAVATTONE, LEN >> <lc9892@att.com>; spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com; ietf@kuehlewind.net; >> ietf@wjcerveny.com; ietf@trammell.ch; tpauly@apple.com >> Cc: prabhjot.sethi@gmail.com; ippm@ietf.org; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6038 (5549) >> >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6038, >> "Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP) Reflect Octets and >> Symmetrical Size Features". >> >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5549 >> >> -------------------------------------- >> Type: Technical >> Reported by: Prabhjot Singh Sethi <prabhjot.sethi@gmail.com> >> >> Section: 5.1.5 >> >> Original Text >> ------------- >> In this combined mode, the Packet Padding to be reflected follows the >> 27 MBZ octets. In Authenticated or Encrypted modes, the Packet >> Padding to be reflected follows the 56 MBZ octets. >> >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> In this combined mode, the Packet Padding to be reflected follows the >> 27 MBZ octets. In Authenticated or Encrypted modes, the Packet >> Padding to be reflected follows the 64 MBZ octets. >> >> Notes >> ----- >> to achieve symmetrical size in authenticated and encrypted mode length of >> mbz field needs to be 64 octects instead of 56 octects >> >> 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 >> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC6038 (draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-reflect-octets-09) >> -------------------------------------- >> Title : Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP) Reflect >> Octets and Symmetrical Size Features >> Publication Date : October 2010 >> Author(s) : A. Morton, L. Ciavattone >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >> Source : IP Performance Measurement >> Area : Transport >> Stream : IETF >> Verifying Party : IESG > _______________________________________________ > ippm mailing list > ippm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm
- Re: [ippm] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6038 (5… MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
- Re: [ippm] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6038 (5… Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)