Re: [manet] [EXT] [Errata Rejected] RFC8175 (6730)
Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 19 November 2021 15:52 UTC
Return-Path: <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFD003A0784; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 07:52:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 fGZXiL-_CroK; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 07:52:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52e.google.com (mail-ed1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52e]) (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 821113A0780; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 07:52:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id y13so44330908edd.13; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 07:52:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=UKdfEuYLfQSy+Qn0FUa1uivyvh3qAooRWyb35YmAVzs=; b=hyo0+qI0wgjbQY5E2o7H57qlMd+IS/kgHw6bey9mLrXh53ePGcFUuxZBu0RYSpxxQ+ Qk9UQkx9AwAXMNfFW7Q5+qVqC8qN/xHEU0RGkw4nmk6luE04V367AQG4xd7mHaho8Pc7 TQT/AszyIgGPBGTM0mOsfppd50wn5FL6vAmaKXMWw6li6z0uh5GrN4nTS8469f7w8qTT QKlDE3fimLtq3BeNT7Y3zUtbdkY0imerceHzA4+ZLMhtquccD9Z4OZ6xGEvbxX3ZHkJG SFLmievbVO97O4Nu9djp357IdQ9XyKcwQ1eEV8APKuE+gmyPPty7D1KpRW0GO3Pwot+k BN5g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=UKdfEuYLfQSy+Qn0FUa1uivyvh3qAooRWyb35YmAVzs=; b=lbA0CHuLlJga321WvS25CWIZZ/L0laLzaSNexPhZ3PhghFMd25EKoJeRGA82L3ZuiV /mbS75nDuaY2DU2FnXkbZg2odueEHKacCh0iRf6RcEs9Jxuv084IybB3yY5RfTTiVzc2 gpjPa9yvN+IkWoItu90DBaNLiRQMI5fSFsQxqyLXxWyoZ/2JvcbcD0MWqsdBuVJhzW6Y x5cWw0SYi1y9giPp+XU3YDG8ABgFTjFszrkeD0wadbbQcn9c/pIcwxR6K1+pH0+C+RE9 D8XI/oegf3gCnG6cesqVaJy1sln3NTdO+ej/C05I6iLl3dZoy53tHlMihVMfE069Er4X GZiA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531wjdbaGVGNtKEMZvEH2H8Pz7wPUTCYLLh4G2auYAOQ2imOrbND mmY13924rRvEjIRjaXXCOuX9DB9L3CmT/yaWmQn4bwv4
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxX3Mn//cX+WPHiniGZ9iz804JmeDq8JaMaOYmWAYtNUrkjvTJAZFEhFhG/kd3CwjFZQz1qc5G4vmwsyRVGbxs=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:270b:: with SMTP id y11mr26413242edd.29.1637337140863; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 07:52:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 07:52:20 -0800
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20211119023732.GN93060@kduck.mit.edu>
References: <20211105212513.7995820EA07@rfc-editor.org> <1b58d4d4f9014a8398ffd5a93459cdd8@jhuapl.edu> <20211119023732.GN93060@kduck.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 07:52:20 -0800
Message-ID: <CAMMESswhuU_rZzXfmXQ9W80HxJWhnfV9wDJ03HNdECyNESh4uA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
Cc: "manet@ietf.org" <manet@ietf.org>, "rick.taylor@airbus.com" <rick.taylor@airbus.com>, "sjury@cisco.com" <sjury@cisco.com>, "sratliff@idirect.net" <sratliff@idirect.net>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, "dsatterw@broadcom.com" <dsatterw@broadcom.com>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "Sipos, Brian J." <brian.sipos@jhuapl.edu>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a8a74805d1264203"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/rl7RDPNMtH2mfngSpGJZKnt_x5U>
Subject: Re: [manet] [EXT] [Errata Rejected] RFC8175 (6730)
X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manet/>
List-Post: <mailto:manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 15:52:28 -0000
Hi Ben! Yes, already done. :-) I had cut the list to avoid the noise. ;-) Alvaro. On November 18, 2021 at 9:37:48 PM, Benjamin Kaduk (kaduk@mit.edu) wrote: An AD can ask the RFC Editor to set the status back to "reported", but I would defer to Alvaro on whether to actually do so. -Ben On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 07:57:54PM +0000, Sipos, Brian J. wrote: > All, > This last errata was about UDP fields, not IP fields that the earlier errata > was correcting. They both just happen to apply to the same signal so they edit > the same paragraph. Can this item be resurrected? > > -----Original Message----- > From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> > Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 5:25 PM > To: Sipos, Brian J. <Brian.Sipos@jhuapl.edu>; sratliff@idirect.net; > sjury@cisco.com; dsatterw@broadcom.com; rick.taylor@airbus.com > Cc: aretana.ietf@gmail.com; iesg@ietf.org; manet@ietf.org; > rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > Subject: [EXT] [Errata Rejected] RFC8175 (6730) > > APL external email warning: Verify sender wwwrun@rfc-editor.org before > clicking links or attachments > > The following errata report has been rejected for RFC8175, "Dynamic Link > Exchange Protocol (DLEP)". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6730 > > -------------------------------------- > Status: Rejected > Type: Technical > > Reported by: Brian Sipos <brian.sipos@jhuapl.edu> Date Reported: 2021-11-03 > Rejected by: Alvaro Retana (IESG) > > Section: 12.4 > > Original Text > ------------- > The Peer Offer Signal completes the discovery process; see Section 7.1. > > Corrected Text > -------------- > The UDP source port and destination port MUST be set to the UDP destination > port and source port, respectively, of the UDP packet containing the > associated Peer Discovery Signal. The Peer Offer Signal completes the > discovery process; see Section 7.1. > > Notes > ----- > The original text did not specify any requirement about the source or > destination UDP port number of the Peer Offer signal. > --VERIFIER NOTES-- > While this is a valid report, it is a duplicate of Errata ID: 6472. I am then > marking this one as Rejected. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC8175 (draft-ietf-manet-dlep-29) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Dynamic Link Exchange Protocol (DLEP) > Publication Date : June 2017 > Author(s) : S. Ratliff, S. Jury, D. Satterwhite, R. Taylor, B. Berry > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Mobile Ad-hoc Networks > Area : Routing > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG
- [manet] [Errata Rejected] RFC8175 (6730) RFC Errata System
- Re: [manet] [EXT] [Errata Rejected] RFC8175 (6730) Sipos, Brian J.
- Re: [manet] [EXT] [Errata Rejected] RFC8175 (6730) Alvaro Retana
- Re: [manet] [EXT] [Errata Rejected] RFC8175 (6730) Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [manet] [EXT] [Errata Rejected] RFC8175 (6730) Alvaro Retana