The following errata report has been rejected for RFC6482, "A Profile for Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs)".
-------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7525 -------------------------------------- Status: Rejected Type: Technical Reported by: Sacha Boudjema <sachaboudj...@gmail.com> Date Reported: 2023-05-26 Rejected by: John Scudder (IESG) 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. --VERIFIER NOTES-- See discussion on the sidrops list at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/cFCZREOerU-jGWWG5zh5PdXTLKE/ This erratum is filed against RFC 6482. Although RFC 6482 has not yet been marked "obsolete", this is only a formality -- draft-ietf-sidrops-rfc6482bis-09 has been approved for publication and is currently in the RFC Editor queue. When editing is complete and rfc6482bis is published as an RFC, 6482 will indeed be obsolete. In that spirit, I'm applying guideline 7 from https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/processing-errata-ietf-stream/ and rejecting this erratum. Note that in the thread referenced above, Job says the erratum is fixed in the bis. If it's not, a new erratum should be raised against the bis. -------------------------------------- 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 sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
