Hi Thomas,

Thank you for pointing this out! I updated the errata report. Let me know if 
any additional changes are needed.

https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8020

Best regards,
Rebecca for the RFC Editor



> On Jul 10, 2024, at 10:55 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> 
> Dear Mahesh and Rebecca,
>  
> Can we also take Carsten's feedback into account and change the first two 
> lines of Figure 7 to move two characters to the left.
>  
> Then everything is perfect.
>  
> Best wishes
> Thomas
>  
> From: Mahesh Jethanandani <[email protected]> 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 8:29 PM
> To: Rebecca Vanrheenen <[email protected]>
> Cc: Graf Thomas, INI-NET-VNC-HCS <[email protected]>; Benoit Claise 
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> RFC Editor <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9487 (8020)
>  
> Be aware: This is an external email.
>  
> Hi Rebecca, 
>  
> Thanks for all the pointers.
>  
> I have reviewed the Errata, and agree that it should be Verified. I will wait 
> till the EOD today to hear any objections, absent which I will go ahead and 
> approve it.
>  
> Cheers.
> 
> 
> On Jul 10, 2024, at 11:00 AM, Rebecca VanRheenen <[email protected]> wrote:
>  
> Hi Mahesh,
> 
> The RPC reviews editorial errata per a decision in 2021; if the RPC cannot 
> handle a particular editorial erratum, we ask the AD to review.
> 
> We have encountered such a case with this erratum -- we consider the change 
> from “srhActiveSegmentIPv6” to “srhSegmentIPv6” to be above editorial. We 
> have thus changed the Type to “Technical”. As Stream Approver, please review 
> and set the Status and Type accordingly (see the definitions at 
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata-definitions/). 
> 
> Note that Thomas (author) submitted the report, and Benoit (another author) 
> supports verifying it. 
> Seehttps://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/fE1FoUZRmuIOP5nS9O7DISFJYzo/.
> 
> You may review the report at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8020
> 
> Information on how to verify errata reports can be found at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/how-to-verify/
> 
> Further information on errata can be found at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.php
> 
> Thank you,
> RFC Editor/rv
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 6, 2024, at 6:43 AM, RFC Errata System <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9487,
> "Export of Segment Routing over IPv6 Information in IP Flow Information 
> Export (IPFIX)".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8020
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Thomas Graf <[email protected]>
> 
> Section: appendix-A.2
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9487#figure-7
> 
>  0                   1                   2                   3
>  0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |         Set ID = 3            |          Length = 24          |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |       Template ID 259         |        Field Count = 3        |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |     Scope Field Count = 1     |0| srhActiveSegmentIPv6 = 495  |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |   Scope 1 Field Length = 4    |0|srhSegmentIPv6End.Behav = 502|
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |       Field Length = 1        |0|srhSegmentIPv6Lo.Length = 501|
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |       Field Length = 4        |           Padding             |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9487#figure-8
> 
> 0                   1                   2                   3
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |         SET ID = 259          |           Length = 28         |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |               srhActiveSegmentIPv6 = 2001:db8::1              |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |srhSegmentIPv6EndpointBehavior |srhSegmentIPv6LocatorLength= 48|
> |= End [1]                      |                               |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |               srhActiveSegmentIPv6 = 2001:db8::4              |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |srhSegmentIPv6EndpointBehavior |srhSegmentIPv6LocatorLength= 48|
> |= End with NEXT-CSID [43]      |                               |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |               srhActiveSegmentIPv6 = 2001:db8::6              |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |srhSegmentIPv6EndpointBehavior |srhSegmentIPv6LocatorLength= 48|
> |= End.DX6 [16]                 |                               |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9487#figure-7
> 
>  0                   1                   2                   3
>  0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |         Set ID = 3            |          Length = 24          |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |       Template ID 259         |        Field Count = 3        |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |     Scope Field Count = 1     |0|     srhSegmentIPv6 = 494    |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |   Scope 1 Field Length = 4    |0|srhSegmentIPv6End.Behav = 502|
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |       Field Length = 1        |0|srhSegmentIPv6Lo.Length = 501|
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |       Field Length = 4        |           Padding             |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> 
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9487#figure-8
> 
> 0                   1                   2                   3
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |         SET ID = 259          |           Length = 28         |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |                  srhSegmentIPv6 = 2001:db8::1                 |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |srhSegmentIPv6EndpointBehavior |srhSegmentIPv6LocatorLength= 48|
> |= End [1]                      |                               |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |                  srhSegmentIPv6 = 2001:db8::4                 |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |srhSegmentIPv6EndpointBehavior |srhSegmentIPv6LocatorLength= 48|
> |= End with NEXT-CSID [43]      |                               |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |                  srhSegmentIPv6 = 2001:db8::6                 |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |srhSegmentIPv6EndpointBehavior |srhSegmentIPv6LocatorLength= 48|
> |= End.DX6 [16]                 |                               |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> 
> Notes
> -----
> Example in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9487#appendix-A.2 should 
> state IE494 srhSegmentIPv6  instead of IE495 srhActiveSegmentIPv6 for mapping 
> the IE510 srhSegmentIPv6LocatorLength and IE502 
> srhSegmentIPv6EndpointBehavior in IPFIX option-template as described 
> inhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9487#section-6.2
> 
> Errata has been reported to me by a software developer of a major vendor 
> working on implementation.
> 
> 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.
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC9487 (draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh-14)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Export of Segment Routing over IPv6 Information in IP 
> Flow Information Export (IPFIX)
> Publication Date    : November 2023
> Author(s)           : T. Graf, B. Claise, P. Francois
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Operations and Management Area Working Group
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
> 
>  
>  
> 
> Mahesh Jethanandani
> [email protected]
>  
>  
>  
>  
> 
>  
> <Mail Attachment.eml>

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to