[tcpm] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9293 (8167)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 04 November 2024 15:55 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietf.org
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from rfcpa.rfc-editor.org (unknown [167.172.21.234]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06BD7C1D5310; Mon, 4 Nov 2024 07:55:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfcpa.rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 461) id 756513B874; Mon, 4 Nov 2024 07:55:47 -0800 (PST)
To: wes@mti-systems.com, tcpm-ads@ietf.org, nsd.ietf@gmail.com, tuexen@fh-muenster.de, ianswett@google.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20241104155547.756513B874@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org>
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2024 07:55:47 -0800
Message-ID-Hash: KMFGLJVRJQFMCR4DM6DLWOHBF2GYC5B6
X-Message-ID-Hash: KMFGLJVRJQFMCR4DM6DLWOHBF2GYC5B6
X-MailFrom: wwwrun@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tcpm.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: abbrev@gmail.com, tcpm@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [tcpm] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9293 (8167)
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/R2xGHGePSPSha1KcFarti6xfdXU>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpm>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tcpm-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tcpm-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tcpm-leave@ietf.org>
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9293, "Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8167 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Christopher Williams <abbrev@gmail.com> Section: 3.10.7.3 Original Text ------------- first check that the sequence number exactly matches RCV.NXT prior to executing the action in the next paragraph. Corrected Text -------------- first check that the ACK field acknowledges our SYN prior to executing the action in the next paragraph. Notes ----- RFC 5961, Section 3.2, under "The modified RST segment processing" (the source of this particular mitigation), reads: > In the SYN-SENT state (a RST received in response to an initial SYN), > the RST is acceptable if the ACK field acknowledges the SYN. The sequence number must exactly match RCV.NXT only in the synchronized states. In the SYN-SENT state, the RCV.NXT variable hasn't been set, and we don't have an Initial Receive Sequence (IRS) number, so it's not possible to validate the sequence number against RCV.NXT. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is spam, it will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC9293 (draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-28) -------------------------------------- Title : Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Publication Date : August 2022 Author(s) : W. Eddy, Ed. Category : INTERNET STANDARD Source : TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [tcpm] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9293 (8167) RFC Errata System