[IPsec] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6290 (3449)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 09 January 2013 12:21 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4371C21F87AC for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 04:21:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.416
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.416 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.184, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OcUrcwH6EJOI for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 04:21:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E8F521F87A9 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 04:21:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 42527B1E002; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 04:11:08 -0800 (PST)
To: ynir@checkpoint.com, wierbows@us.ibm.com, fd@cisco.com, psethi@cisco.com, stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie, turners@ieca.com, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org, yaronf.ietf@gmail.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20130109121108.42527B1E002@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 04:11:08 -0800
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 05:48:03 -0800
Cc: ipsec@ietf.org, valery@smyslov.net, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: [IPsec] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6290 (3449)
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 12:21:31 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6290,
"A Quick Crash Detection Method for the Internet Key Exchange Protocol (IKE)".

You may review the report below and at:

Type: Technical
Reported by: Valery Smyslov <valery@smyslov.net>

Section: 4.1

Original Text
   o  Protocol ID (1 octet) MUST be 1, as this message is related to an
      IKE SA.

Corrected Text
   o  Protocol ID (1 octet) MUST be 0.

RFC5996 (IKEv2) in section 3.10 while describing Protocol ID field in Notify Payload specifies that "If the SPI field is empty, this field MUST be sent as zero and MUST be ignored on receipt". As this RFC requires SPI field to be empty (later in section 4.1), Protocol ID should be zero to be consistent with RFC5996.

This errata 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. 

RFC6290 (draft-ietf-ipsecme-failure-detection-08)
Title               : A Quick Crash Detection Method for the Internet Key Exchange Protocol (IKE)
Publication Date    : June 2011
Author(s)           : Y. Nir, Ed., D. Wierbowski, F. Detienne, P. Sethi
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : IP Security Maintenance and Extensions
Area                : Security
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG