[netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7407 (5886)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Tue, 29 October 2019 09:42 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D30D7120121 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 02:42:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 dT1ATOaZcFPn for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 02:42:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A77AE12010F for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 02:42:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 844E4F40722; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 02:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
To: mbj@tail-f.com, j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de, ibagdona@gmail.com, warren@kumari.net, joelja@bogus.com, kent+ietf@watsen.net, lberger@labn.net
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: mbj@tail-f.com, netmod@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <20191029094216.844E4F40722@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 02:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/wpMXdKynsXNe2oIlKhXUX9PnAtY>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 01 Nov 2019 07:11:33 -0700
Subject: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7407 (5886)
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 09:42:24 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7407,
"A YANG Data Model for SNMP Configuration".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5886

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Martin Björklund <mbj@tail-f.com>

Section: 4.1

Original Text
-------------
        leaf fingerprint {
           type x509c2n:tls-fingerprint;
           mandatory true;
           description
             "Specifies a value with which the fingerprint of the
              full certificate presented by the peer is compared.  If
              the fingerprint of the full certificate presented by the
              peer does not match the fingerprint configured, then the
              entry is skipped, and the search for a match continues.";


Corrected Text
--------------
        leaf fingerprint {
           type x509c2n:tls-fingerprint;
           mandatory true;
           description
             "Specifies a value with which the certificate presented by
              the peer is compared, according to the algorithm defined 
	      in the description of the list node 'cert-to-name'.";


Notes
-----
The quoted text is not consistent with the algorithm described in the list 'cert-to-name'.  Better to simply refer to the cert-to-name description.  The algorithm described in 'cert-to-name' works in the same way as described in the referenced RFC 6353, which makes it clear that this is the intended behaviour.

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. 

--------------------------------------
RFC7407 (draft-ietf-netmod-snmp-cfg-08)
--------------------------------------
Title               : A YANG Data Model for SNMP Configuration
Publication Date    : December 2014
Author(s)           : M. Bjorklund, J. Schoenwaelder
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Network Modeling
Area                : Operations and Management
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG