Re: [Nea] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5792 (3935)

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Thu, 27 March 2014 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: nea@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nea@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD4A21A069C for <nea@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 07:21:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 cMilWXky-bMW for <nea@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 07:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76B8A1A0700 for <nea@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 07:20:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C036BDE3; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:20:57 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P3EX6DmN231c; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:20:57 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [134.226.36.180] (stephen-think.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.180]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EAE0FBDDC; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:20:56 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <533433C9.6010604@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:20:57 +0000
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Paul_Sangster@symantec.com, kaushik@cisco.com, Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com, shanna@juniper.net, sethomso@cisco.com
References: <20140327141847.E42C97FC396@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140327141847.E42C97FC396@rfc-editor.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nea/hWAQaOJgTJkMoVXGpnnGma9PE38
Cc: steve@hannas.com, nea@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Nea] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5792 (3935)
X-BeenThere: nea@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Endpoint Assessment discussion list <nea.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/nea>, <mailto:nea-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nea/>
List-Post: <mailto:nea@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nea-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea>, <mailto:nea-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:21:02 -0000

Given that the WG chair is the reporter here I guess this
is probably going to be ok to approve.

I'll do so next week if nobody complains.

But, Steve (H) please do send me a reminder? Errata are
not naturally top of my list of things to do :-)

Cheers,
S.

On 03/27/2014 02:18 PM, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5792,
> "PA-TNC: A Posture Attribute (PA) Protocol Compatible with Trusted Network Connect (TNC)".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5792&eid=3935
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Steve Hanna <steve@hannas.com>
> 
> Section: 3.1
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> Each PA-TNC message may
> contain one or more attributes associated with the functional
> component identified in the component type (PA Subtype) of the
> Posture Broker (PB) protocol.
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> Each PA-TNC message may
> contain zero or more attributes associated with the functional
> component identified in the component type (PA Subtype) of the
> Posture Broker (PB) protocol.
> 
> Notes
> -----
> Section 4 of RFC 5792 says “A PA-TNC message MUST contain a PA-TNC header (defined in section 3.6. followed by a sequence of zero or more PA-TNC attributes.” This contradicts the text in section 3.1, which says “one or more”. The correct text is “zero or more”. There’s no reason why a PA-TNC message containing zero attributes should be prohibited. For PA-TNC messages with some PA subtypes, an empty message containing no attributes may be enough.
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> 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. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC5792 (draft-ietf-nea-pa-tnc-06)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : PA-TNC: A Posture Attribute (PA) Protocol Compatible with Trusted Network Connect (TNC)
> Publication Date    : March 2010
> Author(s)           : P. Sangster, K. Narayan
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Network Endpoint Assessment
> Area                : Security
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
> 
>