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

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Tue, 16 October 2018 16:41 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: p2psip@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: p2psip@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD0D4130DC9 for <p2psip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 09:41:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.88
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.88 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] 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 U_9pLWSdvUBJ for <p2psip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 09:41:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30505130DFD for <p2psip@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 09:41:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.27] (cpe-70-122-203-106.tx.res.rr.com [70.122.203.106]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w9GGf1r6061182 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 16 Oct 2018 11:41:02 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-70-122-203-106.tx.res.rr.com [70.122.203.106] claimed to be [10.0.1.27]
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Message-Id: <DE618F69-D598-4A5D-BC9C-A3820E00E1E8@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D95917E8-A78B-4B98-903F-701AD6EEFC77"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.0 \(3445.100.39\))
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 11:41:01 -0500
In-Reply-To: <fce0a97a-5508-71e4-d471-910ed11f1aa6@kit.edu>
Cc: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, bbl@lowekamp.net, ekr@rtfm.com, salman@cs.columbia.edu, hgs@cs.columbia.edu, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, br@brianrosen.net, cjbc@it.uc3m.es, p2psip@ietf.org
To: "Bless, Roland (TM)" <roland.bless@kit.edu>
References: <20181016024647.BF7E6B8083B@rfc-editor.org> <fce0a97a-5508-71e4-d471-910ed11f1aa6@kit.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.100.39)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/p2psip/ZQM9Gi_HtjTRO-xle_UEG9BgzfA>
Subject: Re: [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 16:41:25 -0000

Is anyone aware of interop issues or implementation errors likely caused by this?

Thanks!

Ben.

> On Oct 16, 2018, at 2:24 AM, Bless, Roland (TM) <roland.bless@kit.edu>; wrote:
> 
> Dear all,
> 
>> Corrected Text
>> --------------
>> P SHOULD then send a Ping for its own Resource-ID n+1 routed through B.
> 
> this should rather read:
> 
> P SHOULD then send a Ping for Resource-ID n+1 routed through B, where n
> is P's own Node-ID.
> 
> IMHO "own Resource-ID n+1" is a bit confusing, because P is not the
> responsible peer for n+1. What is meant is (own Resource-ID n)+1, but
> that is hard to get from the text.
> 
> Regards
> Roland