Conclusion of Confirmation Call on Resolution of Errata 5170, 5171, 5172, 5173 on RFC8200

[Bob Hinden <[e-mail]>]

This concludes the Confirmation Call on Resolution of Errata 5170, 5171, 5172, 5173 on RFC8200.

A new errata will be filed that resolves the issues raised in Errata 5170, 5171, 5172, and 5173.

The new errata will include the following (as required by the RFC Editor errata system):

--------

Type:

  Technical

Section:

  4.5

Original Text:

  [Text from attachment sec4-5-orig.txt]

Corrected Text:

  [Text from attachment sec4-5-new.txt]

Notes:

   This errata replaces and resolves the issues raised in Errata 5170, 5171, 5172, 5173.   Credit
   goes to Fernando Gont for reporting the issues raised in these errata.   They correctly reported
   that the text in Section 4.5 of RFC8200 defined Fragment Offset as pointing to “Fragmentable Part”,
   this was an error and should have pointed to “Extension & Upper-Layer Headers”.

   After review by the 6man working group the conclusion was to fix the issue in a more general way
   than what was proposed in Errata 5170, 5171, 5172, 5173, hence the need for a new errata.

—————

Note, one this issue is closed, if an updating RFC is found to be useful, the w.g. can discuss this later.

Thanks,
Bob & Ole



> On Dec 4, 2019, at 2:49 PM, Bob Hinden <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> At the Singapore IETF 106 6man session the plan for resolving Errata 5170, 5171, 5172, 5173 on RFC8200 was discussed.  The plan presented was to open a new Errata that describes the errors in the Fragmentation text in Section 4.5 of RFC8200 and include the revised text in sec4-5-new.txt in the errata, and then close Errata 5170, 5171, 5172, and 5173 as “Rejected" with a pointer to the new Errata.  The new Errata would then be marked as “Verified”.  The slides can be found at:
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/106/materials/slides-106-6man-sessa-next-steps-in-rfc8200-fragmentation-errata
> 
> The presentation included the changes in both a side by side diff form, and an inline diff form.
> 
> There was support in the w.g. session for this approach.
> 
> This confirmation call with end on December 18, 2019.
> 
> Note, this action is about how we process the errata, if an updating RFC is found to be useful, the w.g. can discuss this later.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bob & Ole
> 
> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>> From: Bob Hinden <[e-mail]>
>> Subject: Next Steps Errata 5170, 5171, 5172, 5173 on RFC8200
>> Date: November 17, 2019 at 11:30:02 PM PST
>> To: IPv6 List <[e-mail]>
>> Cc: Bob Hinden <[e-mail]>, Suresh Krishnan <[e-mail]>, Ole Trøan <[e-mail]>
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Following up on the discussion from the 6man and the discussion on the IPv6 list, Three files are attached:
>> 
>> sec4-5-orig.txt                  The original section 4.5 from RFC8200
>> sec4-5-new.txt                   The proposed section 4.5 replacement
>> sec4-5-new-from-orig.diff.html   A diff of the two.
>> 
>> This incorporates one change agreed to on the list to change the text describing the first fragment packet from:
>> 
>>   (4)  The first fragment.
>> 
>> to:
>> 
>>   (4)  The remainder of the first fragment.
>> 
>> The plan agreed to with Suresh, our Internet AD, is to open a new Errata that describes the errors in the Fragmentation text in Section 4.5 of RFC8200 and include the revised text in sec4-5-new.txt in the errata, and then close Errata 5170, 5171, 5172, and 5173 as “Rejected" with a pointer to the new Errata.  The new Errata would then be marked as “Held for Document Update”.
>> 
>> This will be discussed at the first 6MAN session on Thursday in Singapore.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Bob & Ole