RFC Errata
Found 8 records.
Status: Verified (4)
RFC 6545, "Real-time Inter-network Defense (RID)", April 2012
Source of RFC: mile (sec)
Errata ID: 3939
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Jim Schaad
Date Reported: 2014-03-29
Verifier Name: Stephen Farrell
Date Verified: 2014-05-08
Section 7.1.1 says:
<iodef-rid:XMLDocument dtype="xml" meaning="xml"> <IODEF-Document lang="en"> <iodef:Incident purpose="traceback" restriction="need-to-know"> <iodef:IncidentID name="CERT-FOR-OUR-DOMAIN"> CERT-FOR-OUR-DOMAIN#207-1 </iodef:IncidentID>
It should say:
<iodef-rid:XMLDocument dtype="xml" meaning="xml"> <iodef:IODEF-Document lang="en"> <iodef:Incident purpose="traceback" restriction="need-to-know"> <iodef:IncidentID name="CERT-FOR-OUR-DOMAIN"> CERT-FOR-OUR-DOMAIN#207-1 </iodef:IncidentID>
Notes:
The IODEF-Document node (both opening and closing) are missing the namespace prefix. Without this, the contents of the node will not be correctly validated.
(Change is in line 2 above. The closing tag change is the same, but is not part of the delta change above.)
Errata ID: 3940
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Jim Schaad
Date Reported: 2014-03-29
Verifier Name: Stephen Farrell
Date Verified: 2014-05-08
Section 5.4 says:
<RID-Document version="2.0" lang="en-US" xmlns:iodef-rid="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-rid-2.0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3c.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-rid-2.0.xsd">
It should say:
<iodef-rid:RID version="2.0" lang="en-US" xmlns:iodef-rid="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-rid-2.0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3c.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-rid-2.0.xsd http://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry/schema/iodef-rid-2.0.xsd">
Notes:
Two errors in the text are fixed:
1. The root node is incorrect. It does not have a namespace declared for the root node and there is no node named RID-Document in the schema that is declared. The correct root node is RID and it should have the rid v2 name space
2. The schemaLocation is a pair of text strings in this location. The first is the namespace and the second is a location to get the schema for that namespace. An alternative is to omit the attribute as any application that is loading this document should already have the schema and should never need to go out and fetch it.
Errata ID: 3410
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Kathleen Moriarty
Date Reported: 2012-11-15
Verifier Name: Sean Turner
Date Verified: 2013-03-16
Section 5.2 says:
AuthorizationStatus One. REQUIRED. ENUM. The listed values are used to provide a response to the requesting CSIRT of the status of a Request, Report, or Query. 1. Approved. The trace was approved and will begin in the current SP. 2. Denied. The trace was denied in the current SP. The next closest SP can use this message to filter traffic from the upstream SP using the example packet to help mitigate the effects of the attack as close to the source as possible. The Acknowledgement message must be passed back to the originator and a Result message must be used from the closest SP to the source in order to indicate actions taken in the IODEF History class.
It should say:
AuthorizationStatus One. REQUIRED. ENUM. The listed values are used to provide a response to the requesting CSIRT of the status of a Request, Report, or Query. 1. Approved. The request was approved and will be processed and acted upon by the receiving SP or the report was approved for processing. 2. Denied. The message was denied for processing by the recipient for the reasons provided in the Justification. If the RID message was a Trace, the next closest SP can use this message to filter traffic from the upstream SP using the example packet to help mitigate the effects of the attack as close to the source as possible. The Acknowledgement message must be passed back to the originator and a Result message must be used from the closest SP to the source in order to indicate actions taken in the IODEF History class.
Notes:
The definition for Approved and Denied was confusing to an implementer. Although the AuthorizationStatus was broadly defined and the message flows in 7 show the Acknowledgement applies to all messages, the Approved and Denied were being read as specific to Trace Requests.
Errata ID: 4303
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Vincent
Date Reported: 2015-03-15
Verifier Name: Kathleen Moriarty
Date Verified: 2015-03-24
Section 7.2. says:
Therefore, MsgDestination is set to 'InvestigationRequest' for the Request message and is included in the diagram below as "Investigation".
It should say:
Therefore, MsgType is set to 'InvestigationRequest' for the Request message and is included in the diagram below as "Investigation".
Notes:
MsgDestination should be changed to MsgType, as in the example.
<iodef-rid:RIDPolicy MsgType="InvestigationRequest"
MsgDestination="SourceOfIncident">
Status: Reported (1)
RFC 6545, "Real-time Inter-network Defense (RID)", April 2012
Source of RFC: mile (sec)
Errata ID: 5614
Status: Reported
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Logan Widick
Date Reported: 2019-01-28
Section 5.1 says:
TrafficType One or many. REQUIRED. The values for the attribute "type" are meant to assist in determining if a trace is appropriate for the SP receiving the request to continue the trace. Multiple values may be selected for this element; however, where possible, it should be restricted to one value that most accurately describes the traffic type. type One or many. REQUIRED. ENUM. The attribute type is used to identify the type of information included in the RID message or the type of incident.
It should say:
TrafficType One or many. REQUIRED. The values for the attribute "type" are meant to assist in determining if a trace is appropriate for the SP receiving the request to continue the trace. Multiple values may be selected for this element; however, where possible, it should be restricted to one value that most accurately describes the traffic type. type One. REQUIRED. ENUM. The attribute type is used to identify the type of information included in the RID message or the type of incident.
Notes:
This is the "similar
issue [that] is also present with the way that the TrafficType is defined
on pages 19-20" that was mentioned in the original submission for errata id 5588.
The text as written (with "One or many" instances of the "type" attribute) suggests that
<TrafficType type="Attack" type="Network"/>
would be legal.
However, the schema (Section 8) and the fact that a single XML tag can't contain more than one instance of a given attribute (see https://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#uniqattspec, "An attribute name MUST NOT appear more than once in the same start-tag or empty-element tag") indicate that the above example of a TrafficType is not legal, and would need to be replaced with:
<TrafficType type="Attack"/>
<TrafficType type="Network"/>
Status: Held for Document Update (3)
RFC 6545, "Real-time Inter-network Defense (RID)", April 2012
Source of RFC: mile (sec)
Errata ID: 3302
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: S Terry Brugger
Date Reported: 2012-07-31
Held for Document Update by: Sean Turner
Date Held: 2012-07-31
Section 7.2.1 says:
SP-1 is represented by CERT-FOR-OUR-DOMAIN and 192.0.2.67. SP-2 is identified by 192, 0.2.98. In this example, SP-2 is the service provider for systems on the 192.0.2.32/27 subnet. The contact for the host 192.0.2.35 is known at the start of the request as 'Constituency-contact@10.1.1.2'.
It should say:
SP-1 is represented by CERT-FOR-OUR-DOMAIN and 192.0.2.67. SP-2 is identified by 192.0.2.98. In this example, SP-2 is the service provider for systems on the 192.0.2.32/27 subnet. The contact for the host 192.0.2.35 is known at the start of the request as 'Constituency-contact@10.1.1.2'.
Notes:
This could also be considered an Editorial erratum; however, since it is a technically invalid address, I selected Technical.
AD: I marked it as editorial because the correct value is used in the example.
Errata ID: 3303
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: S Terry Brugger
Date Reported: 2012-07-31
Held for Document Update by: Sean Turner
Section 9.5 says:
o Protection of data from being viewed by intermediate parties in the path of an Request request should be considered.
It should say:
o Protection of data from being viewed by intermediate parties in the path of a Request request should be considered.
Errata ID: 5588
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Logan Widick
Date Reported: 2018-12-28
Held for Document Update by: Benjamin Kaduk
Date Held: 2019-01-28
Section 5.1 says:
Page 18 says: PolicyRegion One or many. REQUIRED. The values for the attribute "region" are used to determine what policy area may require consideration before a trace can be approved. The PolicyRegion may include multiple selections from the attribute list in order to fit all possible policy considerations when crossing regions, consortiums, or networks. region One or many. REQUIRED. ENUM. The attribute region is used to identify the expected sharing range of the incident information. The region may be within a region or defined by existing relationships such as those of a consortium or a client to a service provider.
It should say:
Page 18 should say: PolicyRegion One or many. REQUIRED. The values for the attribute "region" are used to determine what policy area may require consideration before a trace can be approved. The PolicyRegion may include multiple selections from the attribute list in order to fit all possible policy considerations when crossing regions, consortiums, or networks. region One. REQUIRED. ENUM. The attribute region is used to identify the expected sharing range of the incident information. The region may be within a region or defined by existing relationships such as those of a consortium or a client to a service provider.
Notes:
The text as written (with "One or many" instances of the "region" attribute) suggests that
<PolicyRegion region="ClientToSP" region="SPToClient"/>
would be legal.
However, the schema (Section 8) and the fact that a single XML tag can't contain more than one instance of a given attribute (see https://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#uniqattspec, "An attribute name MUST NOT appear more than once in the same start-tag or empty-element tag") indicate that the above example of a PolicyRegion is not legal, and would need to be replaced with:
<PolicyRegion region="ClientToSP"/>
<PolicyRegion region="SPToClient"/>