Re: [IPsec] IPsec RFC Errata

[Paul Wouters]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:44 PM Tero Kivinen  wrote:

[...]

Thanks for your feedback Tero. I have resolved all the errata that were
mentioned and agreed in our discussions.

> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6339

> >
> > There are two issues here. One is a bad test vector. I think they
> > are likely right, but have no easy way to verify this.
> > The second issue is about clarifying endianness. This should prob
> > be split into a seperate errata and then approved ?
>
> No idea about this one.
>

I have split this errata into two to separate the issues, but also left
them in Reported state.

This means that for IPsec, we currently only have 3 open errata's left:

https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6339

A bad test vector that we need to verify

https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6931

The endianness issue originally included in 6339

https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid4709

ASN.1 proposed fixes for RFC 4301

If anyone can help with these, please speak up :)

Paul
___
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

Re: [IPsec] IPsec RFC Errata

[Michael Richardson]

Tero Kivinen  wrote:
> Actually some of those held for document update errata could also be
> useful to be inlined... Especially for documents which are not yet
> obsoleted ( RFC2104, RFC4301, RFC4302, and RFC4303).

I think that having stuff inlined is always good.

I read your list, and I agree with them all.


--
Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-





signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec