RFC Errata


Errata Search
 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 2 records.

Status: Verified (1)

RFC 9347, "Aggregation and Fragmentation Mode for Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) and Its Use for IP Traffic Flow Security (IP-TFS)", January 2023

Source of RFC: ipsecme (sec)

Errata ID: 8042
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT, PDF, HTML
Reported By: Antony Antony
Date Reported: 2024-07-22
Verifier Name: Paul Wouters
Date Verified: 2024-07-23

Section 7.2 says: 

3-255 	Reserved

It should say:

2-255 	Unassigned

Notes:

The same section, in the previous line, states "1 Congestion Control Format RFC 9347" so 2 is not covered in the registry. It's likely meant to be "Unassigned"?

Status: Reported (1)

RFC 9347, "Aggregation and Fragmentation Mode for Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) and Its Use for IP Traffic Flow Security (IP-TFS)", January 2023

Source of RFC: ipsecme (sec)

Errata ID: 8212
Status: Reported
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT, PDF, HTML
Reported By: Valery Smyslov
Date Reported: 2024-12-18

Section 5.1 says: 

   As the use of the AGGFRAG_PAYLOAD payload is currently only defined
   for non-transport-mode tunnels, the USE_AGGFRAG notification MUST NOT
   be combined with the USE_TRANSPORT notification.

It should say:

   As the use of the AGGFRAG_PAYLOAD payload is currently only defined
   for non-transport-mode tunnels, the USE_AGGFRAG notification MUST NOT
   be combined with the USE_TRANSPORT_MODE notification.

Notes:

There is no "USE_TRANSPORT" notification in IKEv2. The correct name is "USE_TRANSPORT_MODE "(note, that in the other place of this Section the correct name was used).

Report New Errata



Advanced Search