[P2PSIP] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6940 (5530)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Tue, 16 October 2018 02:47 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: p2psip@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: p2psip@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34E56127AC2 for <p2psip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 19:47:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ibdEtx-sFU9x for <p2psip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 19:47:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A20E127333 for <p2psip@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 19:47:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id BF7E6B8083B; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 19:46:47 -0700 (PDT)
To: fluffy@cisco.com, bbl@lowekamp.net, ekr@rtfm.com, salman@cs.columbia.edu, hgs@cs.columbia.edu, ben@nostrum.com, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, adam@nostrum.com, br@brianrosen.net, cjbc@it.uc3m.es
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: michaelc@idssoftware.com, p2psip@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <20181016024647.BF7E6B8083B@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 19:46:47 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/p2psip/DkiGILKsGCXmurX8zPkAxNN-9g0>
Subject: [P2PSIP] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6940 (5530)
X-BeenThere: p2psip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Peer-to-Peer SIP working group discussion list <p2psip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/p2psip>, <mailto:p2psip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/p2psip/>
List-Post: <mailto:p2psip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:p2psip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip>, <mailto:p2psip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 02:47:13 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6940,
"REsource LOcation And Discovery (RELOAD) Base Protocol".

You may review the report below and at:

Type: Technical
Reported by: Michael Chen <michaelc@idssoftware.com>


Original Text
P SHOULD then send a Ping for its own Node-ID routed through B.

Corrected Text
P SHOULD then send a Ping for its own Resource-ID n+1 routed through B.

----- says, "repeat the discovery process used in the initial join", which refers to the 2nd paragraph after 10.5.9:

"It SHOULD send a Ping directed at Resource-ID n+1 (directly after its own Resource-ID)."

Ping Node-ID is simply wrong. This correction makes it consistent with 10.5.9. Credit goes to xramtsov in the mailing list.

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. 

RFC6940 (draft-ietf-p2psip-base-26)
Title               : REsource LOcation And Discovery (RELOAD) Base Protocol
Publication Date    : January 2014
Author(s)           : C. Jennings, B. Lowekamp, Ed., E. Rescorla, S. Baset, H. Schulzrinne
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Peer-to-Peer Session Initiation Protocol RAI
Area                : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG