[Technical Errata Reported] RFC9000 (7578)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Sun, 30 July 2023 18:35 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 953B8C1516F3 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Jul 2023 11:35:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.166
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.166 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3s22-ezvV6Nw for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Jul 2023 11:34:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (unknown [50.223.129.200]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 729F6C151557 for <quic@ietf.org>; Sun, 30 Jul 2023 11:34:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id 3C3F3CD7D1; Sun, 30 Jul 2023 11:34:55 -0700 (PDT)
To: jri.ietf@gmail.com, mt@lowentropy.net, martin.h.duke@gmail.com, Zaheduzzaman.Sarker@ericsson.com, matt.joras@gmail.com, lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com
Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9000 (7578)
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: martenseemann@gmail.com, quic@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20230730183455.3C3F3CD7D1@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2023 11:34:55 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/CnBywS7wvs_a0TegEHjVK-y-Htg>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2023 18:35:00 -0000
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9000, "QUIC: A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7578 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Marten Seemann <martenseemann@gmail.com> Section: 17.2.1 Original Text ------------- Where QUIC might be multiplexed with other protocols (see [RFC7983]), servers SHOULD set the most significant bit of this field (0x40) to 1 so that Version Negotiation packets appear to have the Fixed Bit field. Corrected Text -------------- Unless the server has out-of-band knowledge that clients are not demultiplexing QUIC with other protocols (see [RFC7983]), it SHOULD set the most significant bit of this field (0x40) to 1 so that Version Negotiation packets appear to have the Fixed Bit field. Notes ----- Unless operating in a tightly controlled environment, the server has no way of knowing what other protocols the client might be demultiplexing on the same UDP socket. According to the demultiplexing logic defined in RFC 9443, Version Negotiation packets with 0x40 set to 0 would be misclassified as RTP/RTCP. 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. -------------------------------------- RFC9000 (draft-ietf-quic-transport-34) -------------------------------------- Title : QUIC: A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport Publication Date : May 2021 Author(s) : J. Iyengar, Ed., M. Thomson, Ed. Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : QUIC Area : Transport Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9000 (7578) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9000 (7578) Zaheduzzaman Sarker