[tsvwg] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6458 (6081)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Thu, 09 April 2020 04:47 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14B303A0A9F for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 21:47:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9LaZ9VyvS7F6 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 21:47:06 -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 C7ED73A0A9E for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 21:47:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 2FBA6F4070F; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 21:46:54 -0700 (PDT)
To: randall@lakerest.net, tuexen@fh-muenster.de, ka-cheong.poon@oracle.com, peterlei@cisco.com, vladislav.yasevich@hp.com, martin.h.duke@gmail.com, magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com, david.black@dell.com, gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk, wes@mti-systems.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: wanglihe@ebupt.com, tsvwg@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20200409044654.2FBA6F4070F@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 21:46:54 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/0cviY1kyC9ve6YEc2LVtccLC_BU>
Subject: [tsvwg] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6458 (6081)
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 04:47:08 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6458,
"Sockets API Extensions for the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)".

You may review the report below and at:

Type: Technical
Reported by: wanglihe <wanglihe@ebupt.com>

Section: GLOBAL

Original Text
8.1.26    must indicate that they are
   finished sending a particular record by including the SCTP_EOR flag.

but I can not find where to use SCTP_EOR flag.


5.1  The msg_flags are not used when sending a message with sendmsg().

3.1.4  flags:  No new flags are defined for SCTP at this level.  See
      Section 5 for SCTP-specific flags used in the msghdr structure.

4.1.8 same with 3.1.4

9.10, 9.12    flags:  The same flags as used by the sendmsg() call flags (e.g.,

9.7   flags:  The same as sinfo_flags (see Section 5.3.2).

5.3.2 sinfo_flags not mention about it  

Corrected Text
maybe msg_flags should be used.

Another problem is that, I think it should be discuss about debfine a flag like SCTP_BOR for beginning(init chunk) of a Record, because a stream of this socket(assoc) can still be used after send a SCTP_EOR.

And between  a init chunk and  a STCP_EOR,  if I change SCTP_EXPLICIT_EOR status, what the socket will send the message?

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. 

RFC6458 (draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-32)
Title               : Sockets API Extensions for the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)
Publication Date    : December 2011
Author(s)           : R. Stewart, M. Tuexen, K. Poon, P. Lei, V. Yasevich
Category            : INFORMATIONAL
Source              : Transport Area Working Group
Area                : Transport
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG