[tsvwg] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9260 (7988)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Thu, 13 June 2024 13:57 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietf.org
Delivered-To: tsvwg@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 RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E03E4C151536; Thu, 13 Jun 2024 06:57:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfcpa.rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 461) id 49E7A204E21; Thu, 13 Jun 2024 06:57:21 -0700 (PDT)
To: randall@lakerest.net, tuexen@fh-muenster.de, kee@kamstrup.com, tsvwg-ads@ietf.org, gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk, martenseemann@gmail.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20240613135721.49E7A204E21@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 06:57:21 -0700
Message-ID-Hash: RNV66DNDVW3CNS3IA7XYHHQLBUXUN62J
X-Message-ID-Hash: RNV66DNDVW3CNS3IA7XYHHQLBUXUN62J
X-MailFrom: wwwrun@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tsvwg.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: milen.hristov@huawei.com, tsvwg@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [tsvwg] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9260 (7988)
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/UTCnKRQ-rXXQiOAFPaQIh4LrFto>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tsvwg-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tsvwg-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tsvwg-leave@ietf.org>

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9260,
"Stream Control Transmission Protocol".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7988

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Milen Hristov <milen.hristov@huawei.com>

Section: 3.3.2.  Initiation

Original Text
-------------
not clearly specified  sending IP Address for INIT

Corrected Text
--------------
INIT can be accepted from either the Primary or Secondary IP Address

Notes
-----
Oracle explained clear

https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E57516_01/docs.70/Transport_Manager/concepts/c_transport_mgr_multihoming.html

Some vendors do not accept INIT sent by Secondary Peer IP Address

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.

--------------------------------------
RFC9260 (draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960-bis-19)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Stream Control Transmission Protocol
Publication Date    : June 2022
Author(s)           : R. Stewart, M. Tüxen, K. Nielsen
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Transport and Services Working Group
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG