[ - RFC Editor (for clutter) ]

Dear GROW,

AFAICT, this errata is correct, and should be Verified, but I'd like
some confirmation / double-checkin'.

Note that there is already a somewhat related errata:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6396&rec_status=0

Please let me know by Friday (July 16th) if you disagree with the Errata.
W

On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 9:01 AM RFC Errata System
<rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6396,
> "Multi-Threaded Routing Toolkit (MRT) Routing Information Export Format".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6640
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Claudio Jeker <cje...@diehard.n-r-g.com>
>
> Section: Appendix A
>
> Original Text
> -------------
>       |   BGP Path Attributes =
>
>               40 01 01 00 50 02 00 0e 02 03 00 00 fb f0 00 00
>               fb ff 00 00 fb f6 80 0e 2b 00 02 01 20 20 01 0d
>               b8 00 0d 00 ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 87 fe 80 00
>               00 00 00 00 00 02 12 f2 ff fe 9f 1b 00 00 00 20
>               20 01 0d b8
>
>                   Figure 19: MRT RIB_IPV6_UNICAST Example
>
>    The contents of the BGP Path Attribute field above are as follows:
>
>    ORIGIN: IGP
>    ASPATH: 64496 64511 64502
>    MP_REACH_NLRI(IPv6 Unicast)
>    NEXT_HOP: 2001:db8:d:ff::187
>    NEXT_HOP: fe80::212:f2ff:fe9f:1b00
>    NLRI: 2001:0DB8::/32
>
>                   Figure 20: BGP Path Attribute Contents
>
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>       |   BGP Path Attributes =
>
>               40 01 01 00 50 02 00 0e 02 03 00 00 fb f0 00 00
>               fb ff 00 00 fb f6 80 0e 21 20 20 01 0d b8 00 0d
>               00 ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 87 fe 80 00 00 00 00
>               00 00 02 12 f2 ff fe 9f 1b 00
>
>                   Figure 19: MRT RIB_IPV6_UNICAST Example
>
>    The contents of the BGP Path Attribute field above are as follows:
>
>    ORIGIN: IGP
>    ASPATH: 64496 64511 64502
>    MP_REACH_NLRI(IPv6 Unicast)
>    NEXT_HOP: 2001:db8:d:ff::187
>    NEXT_HOP: fe80::212:f2ff:fe9f:1b00
>
>                   Figure 20: BGP Path Attribute Contents
>
>
> Notes
> -----
> The encoding of the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute is not in the form according to 
> Section 4.3.4.  RIB Entries:
>
>    There is one exception to the encoding of BGP attributes for the BGP
>    MP_REACH_NLRI attribute (BGP Type Code 14) [RFC4760].  Since the AFI,
>    SAFI, and NLRI information is already encoded in the RIB Entry Header
>    or RIB_GENERIC Entry Header, only the Next Hop Address Length and
>    Next Hop Address fields are included.  The Reserved field is omitted.
>    The attribute length is also adjusted to reflect only the length of
>    the Next Hop Address Length and Next Hop Address fields.
>
> The example includes a full MP_REACH_NLRI attribute. This is a common issue 
> with TABLE_DUMP_V2 and parsers need to implement a workaround to support the 
> broken form.
>
> One way of solving this is to compare the attribute length of MP_REACH_NLRI 
> with the first byte of the attribute.
> If the value of the first byte is equal to the attribute lenght - 1 then it 
> is the RFC encoding else assume that a full MP_REACH_NLRI attribute was 
> dumped in which case the parser needs to skip the first 3 bytes to get to the 
> nexthop.
>
> 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.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC6396 (draft-ietf-grow-mrt-17)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Multi-Threaded Routing Toolkit (MRT) Routing 
> Information Export Format
> Publication Date    : October 2011
> Author(s)           : L. Blunk, M. Karir, C. Labovitz
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Global Routing Operations
> Area                : Operations and Management
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG



-- 
The computing scientist’s main challenge is not to get confused by the
complexities of his own making.
  -- E. W. Dijkstra

_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
GROW@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

Reply via email to