RFC Errata


Errata Search
 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 3 records.

Status: Verified (1)

RFC 3410, "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet-Standard Management Framework", December 2002

Source of RFC: snmpv3 (ops)

Errata ID: 281
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: C. M. Heard
Date Reported: 2003-01-29

Section 10.2 says: 

  [15] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser,
       "Coexistence between Version 1 and Version 2 of the Internet-
       Standard Network Management Framework", RFC 2576, January 1996.

It should say:

  [15] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser,
       "Coexistence between Version 1 and Version 2 of the Internet-
       Standard Network Management Framework", RFC 1908, January 1996.

Status: Held for Document Update (2)

RFC 3410, "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet-Standard Management Framework", December 2002

Source of RFC: snmpv3 (ops)

Errata ID: 1559
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Carl Marcinik
Date Reported: 2008-10-11
Held for Document Update by: Dan Romascanu
Date Held: 2010-05-10

Section 6.4 says: 

STD 62, RFC 3415, "View-based Access Control Model (VCAM) for the
Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)" [27], describes how
view-based access control can be applied within command responder
and notification originator applications.

It should say:

STD 62, RFC 3415, "View-based Access Control Model (VACM) for the
Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)" [27], describes how
view-based access control can be applied within command responder
and notification originator applications.

Notes:

--VERIFIER NOTES--
s / VCAM / VACM

Errata ID: 1560
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Carl Marcinik
Date Reported: 2008-10-11
Held for Document Update by: Dan Romascanu

Section 8.2 says: 

Of course, it is important that users deploying multi-lingual systems
with insecure protocols exercise sufficient due diligence to insure
that configurations limit access via SNMPv1 and SNMPv2c
appropriately, in keeping with the organization’s security policy,
just as they should carefully limit access granted via SNMPv3 with a
security level of no authentication and no privacy which is roughly
equivalent from a security point of view.

It should say:

Of course, it is important that users deploying multi-lingual systems
with insecure protocols exercise sufficient due diligence to ensure
that configurations limit access via SNMPv1 and SNMPv2c
appropriately, in keeping with the organization’s security policy,
just as they should carefully limit access granted via SNMPv3 with a
security level of no authentication and no privacy which is roughly
equivalent from a security point of view.

Notes:

The sentence used "insure" when it should have used "ensure".

Report New Errata



Advanced Search