+sidrops
The substance of the erratum is:
- The sentence "The addresses field represents prefixes as a sequence of type
ROAIPAddress” is added at the end of the first paragraph.
This seems like an OK change although not a necessary one. If verified, it’d be
as editorial Hold For Document Update. It doesn’t seem like it adds much to the
spec, so I’m not inclined to verify it but could be talked into it.
- In the second paragraph:
- “a ROAIPAddress structure” -> “the ROAIPAddress structure” (“a”
becomes “the”)
- The ROAIPAddress structure changes from a sequence of IPAddress, to a
single IPaddress (capitalization sic)
The submitter says this change would align the prose description with the
ASN.1. However, I don’t see that — I’m hardly an ASN.1 expert, but on the face
of it, this (from Appendix A, also present in Section 3) looks like a sequence,
not a singleton. The word “sequence” is right there, in ALL CAPS even.
ROAIPAddress ::= SEQUENCE {
address IPAddress,
maxLength INTEGER OPTIONAL }
As far as I can tell, this change is wrong and should be rejected.
I would appreciate a second opinion from someone more conversant with the RFC
and associated technology than I am before I reject it.
—John
> On May 26, 2023, at 2:49 PM, RFC Errata System <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6482,
> "A Profile for Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs)".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7525__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GngQXDPNfl9uVTFUdN8h1LmYMMzXgBRp-NQTdsuPLKBo7KLOI4k9kFTNxaLsmnpNBXUj3GVFEfbA57aSAEPHFg$
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Sacha Boudjema <[email protected]>
>
> Section: 3.3
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> Within the ROAIPAddressFamily structure, addressFamily contains the Address
> Family Identifier (AFI) of an IP address family. This specification only
> supports IPv4 and IPv6. Therefore, addressFamily MUST be either 0001 or 0002.
>
> Within a ROAIPAddress structure, the addresses field represents prefixes as a
> sequence of type IPAddress. (See [RFC3779] for more details). If present,
> the maxLength MUST be an integer ...
>
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> Within the ROAIPAddressFamily structure, addressFamily contains the Address
> Family Identifier (AFI) of an IP address family. This specification only
> supports IPv4 and IPv6. Therefore, addressFamily MUST be either 0001 or
> 0002. The addresses field represents prefixes as a sequence of type
> ROAIPAddress.
>
> Within the ROAIPAddress structure, the address field represents an IPv4 or
> IPv6 prefix of type IPaddress (See [RFC3779] for more details). If present,
> the maxLength MUST be an integer ...
>
> Notes
> -----
> Original text contradicts does not align with normative ASN.1 schema.
>
> Instructions:
> -------------
> 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.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC6482 (draft-ietf-sidr-roa-format-12)
> --------------------------------------
> Title : A Profile for Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs)
> Publication Date : February 2012
> Author(s) : M. Lepinski, S. Kent, D. Kong
> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source : Secure Inter-Domain Routing
> Area : Routing
> Stream : IETF
> Verifying Party : IESG
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
