Re: [Ntp] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9249 (7401)

Hi,

This erratum is correct and should be verified! Thanks Maurice!
Apologies for making the mistake. This kind of blunder can't be detected by
our tools either :) !

Thanks!
Dhruv

On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 5:39 PM RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
wrote:

> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9249,
> "A YANG Data Model for NTP".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7401
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Maurice Angermann <maurice.angermann@siemens.com>
>
> Section: 8
>
> Original Text
> -------------
>   identity hmac-sha-256 {
>     description
>       "HMAC-SHA-256 authentication algorithm";
>     reference
>       "SHS: Secure Hash Standard (SHS) (FIPS PUB 180-4)";
>   }
>
>   identity hmac-sha-384 {
>     description
>       "HMAC-SHA-384 authentication algorithm";
>     reference
>       "SHS: Secure Hash Standard (SHS) (FIPS PUB 180-4)";
>   }
>
>   identity hmac-sha-512 {
>     description
>       "HMAC-SHA-512 authentication algorithm";
>     reference
>       "SHS: Secure Hash Standard (SHS) (FIPS PUB 180-4)";
>   }
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>   identity hmac-sha-256 {
>     base crypto-algorithm;
>     description
>       "HMAC-SHA-256 authentication algorithm";
>     reference
>       "SHS: Secure Hash Standard (SHS) (FIPS PUB 180-4)";
>   }
>
>   identity hmac-sha-384 {
>     base crypto-algorithm;
>     description
>       "HMAC-SHA-384 authentication algorithm";
>     reference
>       "SHS: Secure Hash Standard (SHS) (FIPS PUB 180-4)";
>   }
>
>   identity hmac-sha-512 {
>     base crypto-algorithm;
>     description
>       "HMAC-SHA-512 authentication algorithm";
>     reference
>       "SHS: Secure Hash Standard (SHS) (FIPS PUB 180-4)";
>   }
>
> Notes
> -----
> The identity definitions of "hmac-sha-256", "hmac-sha-384" and
> "hmac-sha-512" lack the "base crypto-algorithm;" statement and therefore
> basically cannot be used in the scope of ietf-ntp@2022-07-05.yang.
>
> 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.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC9249 (draft-ietf-ntp-yang-data-model-17)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : A YANG Data Model for NTP
> Publication Date    : July 2022
> Author(s)           : N. Wu, D. Dhody, Ed., A. Sinha, Ed., A. Kumar S N,
> Y. Zhao
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Network Time Protocols
> Area                : Internet
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>
> _______________________________________________
> ntp mailing list
> ntp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp
>