RFC Errata
Found 5 records.
Status: Verified (4)
RFC 4742, "Using the NETCONF Configuration Protocol over Secure SHell (SSH)", December 2006
Note: This RFC has been obsoleted by RFC 6242
Source of RFC: netconf (ops)
Errata ID: 948
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Eliot Lear
Date Reported: 2007-05-10
Verifier Name: Dan Romascanu
Date Verified: 2009-09-03
Section 3 says:
[user@client]$ ssh -s server.example.org -p <830> netconf
It should say:
[user@client]$ ssh -s server.example.org -p 830 netconf
Notes:
<830> --> 830
from pending
Errata ID: 1628
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Pasi Eronen
Date Reported: 2008-12-04
Verifier Name: Dan Romascanu
Date Verified: 2009-08-31
Section 7 says:
IANA is also requested to assign "netconf" as an SSH Service Name as defined in [RFC4250], as follows: Service Name Reference ------------- --------- netconf RFC 4742
It should say:
IANA is also requested to assign "netconf" as an SSH Connection Protocol Subsystem Name as defined in [RFC4250], as follows: Subsystem Name Reference ------------- --------- netconf RFC 4742
Notes:
The IANA registry (http://www.iana.org/assignments/ssh-parameters)
also needs to be fixed.
Errata ID: 12
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Heikki Kortti
Date Reported: 2007-03-30
Section 9.1 says:
[RFC4721] Enns, R., Ed., "NETCONF Configuration Protocol", RFC 4721, December 2006.
It should say:
[RFC4741] Enns, R., Ed., "NETCONF Configuration Protocol", RFC 4741, December 2006.
Notes:
RFC4742 refers throughout to the NETCONF specification as RFC4721, even though NETCONF is really specified in RFC4741.
from pending
Errata ID: 947
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Eliot Lear
Date Reported: 2007-05-10
Verifier Name: Dan Romascanu
Date Verified: 2009-09-03
Section 3 says:
In order to allow NETCONF traffic to be easily identified and filtered by firewalls and other network devices, NETCONF servers MUST default to providing access to the "netconf" SSH subsystem only when the SSH session is established using the IANA-assigned TCP port <830>.
It should say:
In order to allow NETCONF traffic to be easily identified and filtered by firewalls and other network devices, NETCONF servers MUST default to providing access to the "netconf" SSH subsystem only when the SSH session is established using the IANA-assigned TCP port 830.
Notes:
<830> --> 830
from pending
Status: Rejected (1)
RFC 4742, "Using the NETCONF Configuration Protocol over Secure SHell (SSH)", December 2006
Note: This RFC has been obsoleted by RFC 6242
Source of RFC: netconf (ops)
Errata ID: 1903
Status: Rejected
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Xiang Li
Date Reported: 2009-10-07
Rejected by: Dan Romascanu
Date Rejected: 2010-05-10
Section 3.1 says:
S: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> S: <hello> S: <capabilities> S: <capability> S: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0 S: </capability> S: <capability> S: urn:ietf:params:ns:netconf:capability:startup:1.0 S: </capability> S: </capabilities> S: <session-id>4<session-id> S: </hello> S: ]]>]]> C: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> C: <hello> C: <capabilities> C: <capability> C: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0 C: </capability> C: </capabilities> C: </hello> C: ]]>]]>
It should say:
S: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> S: <hello xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> S: <capabilities> S: <capability> S: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0 S: </capability> S: <capability> S: urn:ietf:params:ns:netconf:capability:startup:1.0 S: </capability> S: </capabilities> S: <session-id>4<session-id> S: </hello> S: ]]>]]> C: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> C: <hello xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> C: <capabilities> C: <capability> C: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0 C: </capability> C: </capabilities> C: </hello> C: ]]>]]>
Notes:
the netconf namespace is missing in the sample hello message (for both client and server hello)
--VERIFIER NOTES--
this change should be discussed by the NETCONF WG as part of RFC 4742bis work