[Technical Errata Reported] RFC3083 (4048)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Technical Errata Reported] RFC3083 (4048)

rfc-editor
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3083,
"Baseline Privacy Interface Management Information Base for DOCSIS Compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination Systems".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3083&eid=4048

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Mark Ellison <[hidden email]>

Section: 4

Original Text
-------------
start(1)

Corrected Text
--------------
start(1),

Notes
-----
errata # 334 for RFC3083 omits the necessary comma at the end of the inserted line 'start(1)'

Instructions:
-------------
This errata 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 (IESG)
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.

--------------------------------------
RFC3083 (draft-ietf-ipcdn-mcns-bpi-mib-02)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Baseline Privacy Interface Management Information Base for DOCSIS Compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination Systems
Publication Date    : March 2001
Author(s)           : R. Woundy
Category            : INFORMATIONAL
Source              : IP over Cable Data Network
Area                : Operations and Management
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

_______________________________________________
IPCDN mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3083 (4048)

Michael StJohns-2
What a blast from the past.  

This is "not an error" , at least as reported.  Three are two places this error might have been reported from - the definition of  docsBpiCmAuthState and  the definition o fdocsBpiCmTEKState.  The former -  I believe correctly -does not include "start (1)" as one of its states.  The latter has "start (1),"  - e.g. including the comma.  So I'm not sure where he's actually seeing the error.

The  MIB  was verified at submission.  I would be surprised if there are any obvious syntactic errors like this in the body of the MIB.

If I remember correctly, the reason the "start" state was excluded from the docsBpiCmAuthState enums is that its never a visible state - the state machine doesn't actually exist until docsIfCmStatusValue is at least todEstablished - (RFC4546) and the state would always be later than "start" so any query about baseline privacy will not necessarily give you valid information prior to todEstablished.

Mike



At 11:02 AM 7/11/2014, RFC Errata System wrote:

>The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3083,
>"Baseline Privacy Interface Management Information Base for DOCSIS Compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination Systems".
>
>--------------------------------------
>You may review the report below and at:
>http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3083&eid=4048
>
>--------------------------------------
>Type: Technical
>Reported by: Mark Ellison <[hidden email]>
>
>Section: 4
>
>Original Text
>-------------
>start(1)
>
>Corrected Text
>--------------
>start(1),
>
>Notes
>-----
>errata # 334 for RFC3083 omits the necessary comma at the end of the inserted line 'start(1)'
>
>Instructions:
>-------------
>This errata 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 (IESG)
>can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>
>--------------------------------------
>RFC3083 (draft-ietf-ipcdn-mcns-bpi-mib-02)
>--------------------------------------
>Title               : Baseline Privacy Interface Management Information Base for DOCSIS Compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination Systems
>Publication Date    : March 2001
>Author(s)           : R. Woundy
>Category            : INFORMATIONAL
>Source              : IP over Cable Data Network
>Area                : Operations and Management
>Stream              : IETF
>Verifying Party     : IESG
>
>_______________________________________________
>IPCDN mailing list
>[hidden email]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn


_______________________________________________
IPCDN mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3083 (4048)

Mark Ellison
In reply to this post by rfc-editor
Hi Guys,

Thanks for your reply.

My submission is in regard to the docsBpiCmAuthState object.  If you look at the technical errata submitted here: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3083  then you will see the comma is clearly omitted from the 'fixed' text:

It should say:

   docsBpiCmAuthState      OBJECT-TYPE
   SYNTAX                  INTEGER {

                                   start(1)
                                   authWait(2),
                                   authorized(3),
                                   reauthWait(4),
                                   authRejectWait(5)


Maybe what you are saying is that the above fix is not required?  If so, it is misleading...and either way, syntactically incorrect!

Regards,

Mark


On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Michael StJohns <[hidden email]> wrote:
What a blast from the past.

This is "not an error" , at least as reported.  Three are two places this error might have been reported from - the definition of  docsBpiCmAuthState and  the definition o fdocsBpiCmTEKState.  The former -  I believe correctly -does not include "start (1)" as one of its states.  The latter has "start (1),"  - e.g. including the comma.  So I'm not sure where he's actually seeing the error.

The  MIB  was verified at submission.  I would be surprised if there are any obvious syntactic errors like this in the body of the MIB.

If I remember correctly, the reason the "start" state was excluded from the docsBpiCmAuthState enums is that its never a visible state - the state machine doesn't actually exist until docsIfCmStatusValue is at least todEstablished - (RFC4546) and the state would always be later than "start" so any query about baseline privacy will not necessarily give you valid information prior to todEstablished.

Mike



At 11:02 AM 7/11/2014, RFC Errata System wrote:
>The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3083,
>"Baseline Privacy Interface Management Information Base for DOCSIS Compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination Systems".
>
>--------------------------------------
>You may review the report below and at:
>http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3083&eid=4048
>
>--------------------------------------
>Type: Technical
>Reported by: Mark Ellison <[hidden email]>
>
>Section: 4
>
>Original Text
>-------------
>start(1)
>
>Corrected Text
>--------------
>start(1),
>
>Notes
>-----
>errata # 334 for RFC3083 omits the necessary comma at the end of the inserted line 'start(1)'
>
>Instructions:
>-------------
>This errata 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 (IESG)
>can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>
>--------------------------------------
>RFC3083 (draft-ietf-ipcdn-mcns-bpi-mib-02)
>--------------------------------------
>Title               : Baseline Privacy Interface Management Information Base for DOCSIS Compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination Systems
>Publication Date    : March 2001
>Author(s)           : R. Woundy
>Category            : INFORMATIONAL
>Source              : IP over Cable Data Network
>Area                : Operations and Management
>Stream              : IETF
>Verifying Party     : IESG
>
>_______________________________________________
>IPCDN mailing list
>[hidden email]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn






_______________________________________________
IPCDN mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3083 (4048)

Michael StJohns-2
Ok.  That makes sense.  I didn't realize Rich had posted an errata.  The "start" is extraneous but harmless, but does need the comma if present.  Mike

Sent from my iPad

On Jul 12, 2014, at 7:55, Mark Ellison <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Guys,

Thanks for your reply.

My submission is in regard to the docsBpiCmAuthState object.  If you look at the technical errata submitted here: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3083  then you will see the comma is clearly omitted from the 'fixed' text:

It should say:

   docsBpiCmAuthState      OBJECT-TYPE
   SYNTAX                  INTEGER {

                                   start(1)
                                   authWait(2),
                                   authorized(3),
                                   reauthWait(4),
                                   authRejectWait(5)


Maybe what you are saying is that the above fix is not required?  If so, it is misleading...and either way, syntactically incorrect!

Regards,

Mark


On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Michael StJohns <[hidden email]> wrote:
What a blast from the past.

This is "not an error" , at least as reported.  Three are two places this error might have been reported from - the definition of  docsBpiCmAuthState and  the definition o fdocsBpiCmTEKState.  The former -  I believe correctly -does not include "start (1)" as one of its states.  The latter has "start (1),"  - e.g. including the comma.  So I'm not sure where he's actually seeing the error.

The  MIB  was verified at submission.  I would be surprised if there are any obvious syntactic errors like this in the body of the MIB.

If I remember correctly, the reason the "start" state was excluded from the docsBpiCmAuthState enums is that its never a visible state - the state machine doesn't actually exist until docsIfCmStatusValue is at least todEstablished - (RFC4546) and the state would always be later than "start" so any query about baseline privacy will not necessarily give you valid information prior to todEstablished.

Mike



At 11:02 AM 7/11/2014, RFC Errata System wrote:
>The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3083,
>"Baseline Privacy Interface Management Information Base for DOCSIS Compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination Systems".
>
>--------------------------------------
>You may review the report below and at:
>http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3083&eid=4048
>
>--------------------------------------
>Type: Technical
>Reported by: Mark Ellison <[hidden email]>
>
>Section: 4
>
>Original Text
>-------------
>start(1)
>
>Corrected Text
>--------------
>start(1),
>
>Notes
>-----
>errata # 334 for RFC3083 omits the necessary comma at the end of the inserted line 'start(1)'
>
>Instructions:
>-------------
>This errata 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 (IESG)
>can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>
>--------------------------------------
>RFC3083 (draft-ietf-ipcdn-mcns-bpi-mib-02)
>--------------------------------------
>Title               : Baseline Privacy Interface Management Information Base for DOCSIS Compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination Systems
>Publication Date    : March 2001
>Author(s)           : R. Woundy
>Category            : INFORMATIONAL
>Source              : IP over Cable Data Network
>Area                : Operations and Management
>Stream              : IETF
>Verifying Party     : IESG
>
>_______________________________________________
>IPCDN mailing list
>[hidden email]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn






_______________________________________________
IPCDN mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3083 (4048)

Woundy, Richard
Wow. I don't even remember why I submitted that errata, 13 years ago. And I left Cisco ([hidden email]) 12 years ago.

In any case, I agree with this submission.

-- Rich

On Jul 12, 2014, at 9:29 AM, "Michael StJohns" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Ok.  That makes sense.  I didn't realize Rich had posted an errata.  The "start" is extraneous but harmless, but does need the comma if present.  Mike

Sent from my iPad

On Jul 12, 2014, at 7:55, Mark Ellison <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Guys,

Thanks for your reply.

My submission is in regard to the docsBpiCmAuthState object.  If you look at the technical errata submitted here: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3083  then you will see the comma is clearly omitted from the 'fixed' text:

It should say:

   docsBpiCmAuthState      OBJECT-TYPE
   SYNTAX                  INTEGER {

                                   start(1)
                                   authWait(2),
                                   authorized(3),
                                   reauthWait(4),
                                   authRejectWait(5)


Maybe what you are saying is that the above fix is not required?  If so, it is misleading...and either way, syntactically incorrect!

Regards,

Mark


On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Michael StJohns <[hidden email]> wrote:
What a blast from the past.

This is "not an error" , at least as reported.  Three are two places this error might have been reported from - the definition of  docsBpiCmAuthState and  the definition o fdocsBpiCmTEKState.  The former -  I believe correctly -does not include "start (1)" as one of its states.  The latter has "start (1),"  - e.g. including the comma.  So I'm not sure where he's actually seeing the error.

The  MIB  was verified at submission.  I would be surprised if there are any obvious syntactic errors like this in the body of the MIB.

If I remember correctly, the reason the "start" state was excluded from the docsBpiCmAuthState enums is that its never a visible state - the state machine doesn't actually exist until docsIfCmStatusValue is at least todEstablished - (RFC4546) and the state would always be later than "start" so any query about baseline privacy will not necessarily give you valid information prior to todEstablished.

Mike



At 11:02 AM 7/11/2014, RFC Errata System wrote:
>The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3083,
>"Baseline Privacy Interface Management Information Base for DOCSIS Compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination Systems".
>
>--------------------------------------
>You may review the report below and at:
>http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3083&eid=4048
>
>--------------------------------------
>Type: Technical
>Reported by: Mark Ellison <[hidden email]>
>
>Section: 4
>
>Original Text
>-------------
>start(1)
>
>Corrected Text
>--------------
>start(1),
>
>Notes
>-----
>errata # 334 for RFC3083 omits the necessary comma at the end of the inserted line 'start(1)'
>
>Instructions:
>-------------
>This errata 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 (IESG)
>can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>
>--------------------------------------
>RFC3083 (draft-ietf-ipcdn-mcns-bpi-mib-02)
>--------------------------------------
>Title               : Baseline Privacy Interface Management Information Base for DOCSIS Compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination Systems
>Publication Date    : March 2001
>Author(s)           : R. Woundy
>Category            : INFORMATIONAL
>Source              : IP over Cable Data Network
>Area                : Operations and Management
>Stream              : IETF
>Verifying Party     : IESG
>
>_______________________________________________
>IPCDN mailing list
>[hidden email]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn






_______________________________________________
IPCDN mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3083 (4048)

Alice Russo
Greetings,

With AD approval, Errata ID 334 has been corrected as indicated:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=334

Errata ID 4048 has been removed from the system because it was an erratum for an erratum. (In the future, please direct corrections to existing errata to [hidden email].)

Thank you.
RFC Editor/ar

On Jul 12, 2014, at 10:44 AM, Woundy, Richard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Wow. I don't even remember why I submitted that errata, 13 years ago. And I left Cisco ([hidden email]) 12 years ago.
>
> In any case, I agree with this submission.
>
> -- Rich
>
> On Jul 12, 2014, at 9:29 AM, "Michael StJohns" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Ok.  That makes sense.  I didn't realize Rich had posted an errata.  The "start" is extraneous but harmless, but does need the comma if present.  Mike
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Jul 12, 2014, at 7:55, Mark Ellison <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Guys,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your reply.
>>>
>>> My submission is in regard to the docsBpiCmAuthState object.  If you look at the technical errata submitted here: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3083  then you will see the comma is clearly omitted from the 'fixed' text:
>>>
>>> It should say:
>>>
>>>    docsBpiCmAuthState      OBJECT-TYPE
>>>    SYNTAX                  INTEGER {
>>>
>>>                                    start(1)
>>>                                    authWait(2),
>>>                                    authorized(3),
>>>                                    reauthWait(4),
>>>                                    authRejectWait(5)
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe what you are saying is that the above fix is not required?  If so, it is misleading...and either way, syntactically incorrect!
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Michael StJohns <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> What a blast from the past.
>>>
>>> This is "not an error" , at least as reported.  Three are two places this error might have been reported from - the definition of  docsBpiCmAuthState and  the definition o fdocsBpiCmTEKState.  The former -  I believe correctly -does not include "start (1)" as one of its states.  The latter has "start (1),"  - e.g. including the comma.  So I'm not sure where he's actually seeing the error.
>>>
>>> The  MIB  was verified at submission.  I would be surprised if there are any obvious syntactic errors like this in the body of the MIB.
>>>
>>> If I remember correctly, the reason the "start" state was excluded from the docsBpiCmAuthState enums is that its never a visible state - the state machine doesn't actually exist until docsIfCmStatusValue is at least todEstablished - (RFC4546) and the state would always be later than "start" so any query about baseline privacy will not necessarily give you valid information prior to todEstablished.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> At 11:02 AM 7/11/2014, RFC Errata System wrote:
>>> >The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3083,
>>> >"Baseline Privacy Interface Management Information Base for DOCSIS Compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination Systems".
>>> >
>>> >--------------------------------------
>>> >You may review the report below and at:
>>> >http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3083&eid=4048
>>> >
>>> >--------------------------------------
>>> >Type: Technical
>>> >Reported by: Mark Ellison <[hidden email]>
>>> >
>>> >Section: 4
>>> >
>>> >Original Text
>>> >-------------
>>> >start(1)
>>> >
>>> >Corrected Text
>>> >--------------
>>> >start(1),
>>> >
>>> >Notes
>>> >-----
>>> >errata # 334 for RFC3083 omits the necessary comma at the end of the inserted line 'start(1)'
>>> >
>>> >Instructions:
>>> >-------------
>>> >This errata 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 (IESG)
>>> >can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>>> >
>>> >--------------------------------------
>>> >RFC3083 (draft-ietf-ipcdn-mcns-bpi-mib-02)
>>> >--------------------------------------
>>> >Title               : Baseline Privacy Interface Management Information Base for DOCSIS Compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination Systems
>>> >Publication Date    : March 2001
>>> >Author(s)           : R. Woundy
>>> >Category            : INFORMATIONAL
>>> >Source              : IP over Cable Data Network
>>> >Area                : Operations and Management
>>> >Stream              : IETF
>>> >Verifying Party     : IESG
>>> >
>>> >_______________________________________________
>>> >IPCDN mailing list
>>> >[hidden email]
>>> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

_______________________________________________
IPCDN mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn