Re: [netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8572 (6684)

[Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alex,

	The Errata system is rather particular...
	Can you file another errata with just the corrected text?

Rob,

	As AD, can you cancel https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6684? <https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6684?>

Thanks,
Kent (all hats)


> On Sep 19, 2021, at 3:18 AM, Alex Krichevsky <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Ian,
>  
> Thank you very much for your response!
> Agreed, your version of the correction is fine too.
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Alex Krichevsky
> Embedded Software Director
> 21 Hamelacha Street|Rosh Haayin, 48091| 
> Edan 1 Twin Building|Park Afek|P.O.Box 11459|Israel 
> Mobile: +972+506347290
> Web: www.asocscloud.com <http://www.asocscloud.com/>|  
> Follow us on LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/company/54063/> 
> <image001.png>
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> 
> Sent: Thursday, 16 September 2021 10:48
> To: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> Cc: Alex Krichevsky <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8572 (6684)
>  
> Hi,
>  
> The intent of the text is to define how OPTION_V4_SZTP_REDIRECT when larger than 255 bytes is conveyed in the DHCP message.
>  
> RFC3396 describes how this is achieved – the >255 byte option is created, it is then split on an octet boundary into multiple instances
> of, in this case, OPTION_V4_SZTP_REDIRECT options which are placed in the DHCP message.
>  
> On receipt, the client re-assembles all of the instances of OPTION_V4_SZTP_REDIRECT into a single option and then processes the resulting
> payload.
>  
> The proposed wording change could be interpreted to permit multiple ‘self-contained’ (i.e. not split according to RFC396)  instances of the
> option in a message, which is not generally permitted  and may not work with client implementations.
>  
> I agree that the current text can be read as contradictory. I suggest the following change to resolve this:
>  
> Original
> ----
>    The DHCPv4 server MAY include a single instance of the
>    OPTION_V4_SZTP_REDIRECT option in DHCP messages it sends.  Servers
>    MUST NOT send more than one instance of the OPTION_V4_SZTP_REDIRECT
>    option.
>  
> Corrected
> -----
> The DHCPv4 server MAY include OPTION_V4_SZTP_REDIRECT in DHCP messages it sends.
>  
> As the remainder of the section explains the intended behavior referencing RFC3396, I think this removes the ambiguity.
>  
> Thanks,
> Ian
>  
>  
> From: RFC Errata System <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Date: Tuesday, 14. September 2021 at 13:16
> To: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Farrer, Ian <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]><[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]><[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8572 (6684)
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8572,
> "Secure Zero Touch Provisioning (SZTP)".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6684 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6684>
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Alex Krichevsky <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> 
> Section: 8.1
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
>    The DHCPv4 server MAY include a single instance of the
>    OPTION_V4_SZTP_REDIRECT option in DHCP messages it sends.  Servers
>    MUST NOT send more than one instance of the OPTION_V4_SZTP_REDIRECT
>    option.
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>    The DHCPv4 server MAY include a single instance or multiple instances of the
>    OPTION_V4_SZTP_REDIRECT option in DHCP messages it sends.
> 
> Notes
> -----
> The original text contradicts the statement in the same section:
>    "If the length of the 'bootstrap-server-list' field is too large to
>    fit into a single option, then OPTION_V4_SZTP_REDIRECT MUST be split
>    into multiple instances of the option according to the process
>    described in [RFC3396]."
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum 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  
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC8572 (draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch-29)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Secure Zero Touch Provisioning (SZTP)
> Publication Date    : April 2019
> Author(s)           : K. Watsen, I. Farrer, M. Abrahamsson
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Network Configuration
> Area                : Operations and Management
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG