Re: [rohc] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5225 (2703)

Carl Knutsson <carl.knutsson@effnet.com> Thu, 03 February 2011 13:32 UTC

Return-Path: <carl.knutsson@effnet.com>
X-Original-To: rohc@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rohc@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B33773A694C for <rohc@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Feb 2011 05:32:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zFYzMTioc04K for <rohc@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Feb 2011 05:32:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists.levonline.com (lists.levonline.com [217.70.33.37]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15A973A6919 for <rohc@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Feb 2011 05:32:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by lists.levonline.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1EF5268566 for <rohc@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Feb 2011 14:36:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: from lists.levonline.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lists.levonline.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mXDWTpUdmzcW for <rohc@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Feb 2011 14:36:00 +0100 (CET)
Received: from traktor1.fordonnet.levonline.com (webhotel.fordon.levonline.com [217.70.32.2]) by lists.levonline.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E796626810E; Thu, 3 Feb 2011 14:35:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.101.21] (c-b10171d5.04-205-6c756c1.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se [213.113.1.177]) (authenticated bits=0) by traktor1.fordonnet.levonline.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p13DZxcj003052 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 3 Feb 2011 14:35:59 +0100
Message-ID: <4D4AAF39.5050405@effnet.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2011 14:35:53 +0100
From: Carl Knutsson <carl.knutsson@effnet.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
References: <20110203122200.A4749E06B4@rfc-editor.org> <DF9B84C1-2794-49B6-BF7E-9C871E5673F2@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <DF9B84C1-2794-49B6-BF7E-9C871E5673F2@nokia.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: kristofer.sandlund@ericsson.com, rohc@ietf.org, David Harrington <ietfdbh@comcast.net>, ghyslain.pelletier@ericsson.com
Subject: Re: [rohc] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5225 (2703)
X-BeenThere: rohc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Robust Header Compression <rohc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc>, <mailto:rohc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rohc>
List-Post: <mailto:rohc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rohc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc>, <mailto:rohc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2011 13:32:42 -0000

Lars, others,

I have had an on-list discussion with Sasha and an off-list with
Kristofer and I have come up with the suggested correction. The actual
details of the suggestion in the errata haven't been discussed. So I
would like people to review the errata. Comments from the authors would
also be appreciated.

There are three things that I'd like to point out here:

1) There is no ip_id_behavior control field in the FN of RFC 5225. Only
ip_id_behavior_innermost and ip_id_behavior_outer.

2) Not to include the control field for outer IPv6 headers is the actual
bug fix. There does not exist any ip_id_behavior_outer control field in
the FN for ipv6 (it does for ipv4).

3) Excluding the control field for the innermost IPv6 header may be
considered a change and not a correction, but since the whole business
with the ip_id_behavior is not crystal clear...

So especially number 3) is up for discussion and also my suggestion for
the Corrected Text.

cheers,

/Calle

On 02/03/2011 01:52 PM, Lars Eggert wrote:
> Based on the ongoing discussion, I assume the community consensus is to approve this?
> 
> On 2011-2-3, at 14:22, RFC Errata System wrote:
> 
>>
>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5225,
>> "RObust Header Compression Version 2 (ROHCv2): Profiles for RTP, UDP, IP, ESP and UDP-Lite".
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> You may review the report below and at:
>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5225&eid=2703
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> Type: Technical
>> Reported by: Carl Knutsson <carl.knutsson@effnet.com>
>>
>> Section: 6.6.11
>>
>> Original Text
>> -------------
>> o  ip_id_behavior, one octet for each IP header in the compressible
>>
>>   header chain starting from the outermost header.  Each octet
>>
>>   consists of 2 bits padded with 6 MSBs of zeroes.
>>
>> Corrected Text
>> --------------
>> o  ip_id_behavior_outer, one octet for each IPv4 header except the
>>
>>   innermost in the compressible header chain starting from the outermost 
>>
>>   header. Each octet consists of 2 bits padded with 6 MSBs of zeroes.
>>
>>
>>
>> o  ip_id_behavior_innermost, one octet if the innermost header is an 
>>
>>   IPv4 header. The octet consists of 2 bits padded with 6 MSBs of zeroes.
>>
>> Notes
>> -----
>> There is no control field called ip_ip_behavior in the document. There are two control fields related to IP-ID behavior, ip_id_behavior_innermost and ip_id_behavior_outer. For IPv6, only the ip_id_behavior_innermost field exists and its value is always IP_ID_BEHAVIOR_RANDOM according to the FN. This makes it impossible to include ip_id_behavior_outer when calculating the crc for IPv6 headers. Furthermore, since the ip_id_behavior_innermost is constant it makes no sense to include it in the crc calculation.
>>
>> Instructions:
>> -------------
>> This errata 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 (IESG)
>> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> RFC5225 (draft-ietf-rohc-rfc3095bis-rohcv2-profiles-06)
>> --------------------------------------
>> Title               : RObust Header Compression Version 2 (ROHCv2): Profiles for RTP, UDP, IP, ESP and UDP-Lite
>> Publication Date    : April 2008
>> Author(s)           : G. Pelletier, K. Sandlund
>> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
>> Source              : Robust Header Compression
>> Area                : Transport
>> Stream              : IETF
>> Verifying Party     : IESG
>