IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4443 (6153)

Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> Mon, 22 February 2021 20:50 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 615E43A20B1 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 12:50:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 TDgshVcLuigK for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 12:50:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:3::74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A51563A202E for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 12:50:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:420:c0c0:1002::28] (unknown [IPv6:2001:420:c0c0:1002::28]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E98044E11B62; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 20:50:38 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-F3D0E1D0-ADED-4967-BAF8-618B5A9FFC38"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4443 (6153)
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 21:50:33 +0100
Message-Id: <80D0E6B0-42AA-45F3-8C21-2BCDC7B021AB@employees.org>
References: <CALZ3u+aLw7Kmk5f7hXWYsFYi5YfKB7mZ3k9XCsHZnzT+9_xovw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Daniel Ginsburg <dginsburg@gmail.com>, IPv6 IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
In-Reply-To: <CALZ3u+aLw7Kmk5f7hXWYsFYi5YfKB7mZ3k9XCsHZnzT+9_xovw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18D52)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/kYXd-m-PhsjIuW2bQubN67rXooY>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 20:50:57 -0000

Töma,

I have read your errata. 
I am not  sure I understand the ambiguity. Could you try to explain it in more detail?

Cheers 
Ole

> On 22 Feb 2021, at 21:41, Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Folks.
> 
>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 11:37 PM Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 2:04 PM RFC Errata System
>> <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>> > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC4443,
>> > "Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification".
>> 
>> (removing dead email addresses)
>> Any other opinions?
> 
> 
> It's been quite a while, isn't it?
> 
> --
> Töma
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email