RFC Errata
Found 5 records.
Status: Verified (5)
RFC 4861, "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", September 2007
Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 5942, RFC 6980, RFC 7048, RFC 7527, RFC 7559, RFC 8028, RFC 8319, RFC 8425, RFC 9131
Source of RFC: ipv6 (int)
Errata ID: 1595
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Teco Boot
Date Reported: 2008-11-11
Verifier Name: Brian Haberman
Date Verified: 2012-06-01
Section 2.2 says:
asymmetric reachability
- a link where non-reflexive and/or non-transitive
reachability is part of normal operation. (Non-
reflexive reachability means packets from A reach B,
but packets from B don't reach A. Non-transitive
reachability means packets from A reach B, and
packets from B reach C, but packets from A don't
reach C.) Many radio links exhibit these
properties.
It should say:
asymmetric reachability
- a link where uni-directional and/or non-transitive
reachability is part of normal operation. (Uni-
directional reachability means packets from A reach B,
but packets from B don't reach A. Non-transitive
reachability means packets from A reach B, and
packets from B reach C, but packets from A don't
reach C.) Many radio links exhibit these
properties.
Notes:
Discussed on Autoconf ML:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf/current/msg01119.html
Term non-reflexive link is "link to itself". To be replaced with either asymmetric, non-symmetric or uni-directional. Asymmetric and Non-symmetric are confusing as those are often used for asymmetric link metrics (e.g. ADSL, UMTS/HSPDA).
Errata ID: 2709
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Jan Kramer
Date Reported: 2011-02-09
Verifier Name: Brian Haberman
Date Verified: 2012-10-03
Section Appendix C says:
!INCOMPLETE NA, Solicited=1, - REACHABLE
Override=0
Same link-layer
address as cached.
!INCOMPLETE NA, Solicited=any, Update content of unchanged
Override=any, No IsRouter flag.
link-layer address
It should say:
!INCOMPLETE NA, Solicited=1, - REACHABLE
Override=0
Same link-layer
address as cached.
!INCOMPLETE NA, Solicited=1, Update content of REACHABLE
Override=any, No IsRouter flag.
link-layer address
!INCOMPLETE NA, Solicited=0, Update content of unchanged
Override=any, No IsRouter flag.
link-layer address
or
!INCOMPLETE NA, Solicited=1, - REACHABLE
Override=0
Same link-layer
address as cached
or no link-layer
address
!INCOMPLETE NA, Solicited=any, Update content of unchanged
Override=any, No IsRouter flag.
link-layer address
Notes:
Section 7.2.4. says:
"If the solicitation's IP Destination Address is
not a multicast address, the Target Link-Layer Address option MAY be
omitted; the neighboring node's cached value must already be current
in order for the solicitation to have been received."
Consider host A has a Neighbor Cache Entry for a unicast address of host B with the state PROBE. If it sends an NS to that address, B will answer with a NA.
If the Target Link-Layer Address is actually omitted, the host which sent the solicitation would only update the IsRouter flag of the Neighbor Cache Entry and leave the state unchanged.
At retransmit timeout host A would send another NS, since the state is still PROBE. After some retransmissions the entry would be discarded, although it was obviously reachable.
With one of the above suggestions, the Neighbor Cache Entry will be marked as REACHABLE, even if no Target Link-Layer Option is included in the NA.
Errata ID: 3154
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ladislav Lhotka
Date Reported: 2012-03-11
Verifier Name: Brian Haberman
Date Verified: 2012-12-12
Section 6.2.1 says:
Default: 0.33 * MaxRtrAdvInterval If MaxRtrAdvInterval >= 9 seconds; otherwise, the Default is MaxRtrAdvInterval.
It should say:
Default: 0.33 * MaxRtrAdvInterval If MaxRtrAdvInterval >= 9 seconds; otherwise, the Default is 0.75 * MaxRtrAdvInterval.
Notes:
The original text contradicts the previous paragraph in the definition of MinRtrAdvInterval, which says: "MUST be no less than 3 seconds and no greater than .75 * MaxRtrAdvInterval."
Errata ID: 6983
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ramakrishna Rao DTV
Date Reported: 2022-05-30
Verifier Name: Eric Vyncke
Date Verified: 2023-08-03
Section 11.1 says:
Redirect attacks can also be achieved by any host in order to flood a victim or steal its traffic. A host can send a Neighbor Advertisement (in response to a solicitation) that contains its IP address and a victim's link-layer address in order to flood the victim with unwanted traffic. Alternatively, the host can send a Neighbor Advertisement that includes a victim's IP address and its own link-layer address to overwrite an existing entry in the sender's destination cache, thereby forcing the sender to forward all of the victim's traffic to itself.
It should say:
Redirect attacks can also be achieved by any host in order to flood a victim or steal its traffic. A host can send a Neighbor Advertisement (in response to a solicitation) that contains its IP address and a victim's link-layer address in order to flood the victim with unwanted traffic. Alternatively, the host can send a Neighbor Advertisement that includes a victim's IP address and its own link-layer address to overwrite an existing entry in the sender's neighbor cache, thereby forcing the sender to forward all of the victim's traffic to itself.
Notes:
s/destination cache/neighbor cache/
Neighbor advertisement affects neighbor cache and not destination cache.
Errata ID: 4461
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Zhou Yangchao
Date Reported: 2015-08-30
Verifier Name: Brian Haberman
Date Verified: 2015-09-14
Section 6.2.3 says:
- In the Cur Hop Limit field: the interface's configured
CurHopLimit.
It should say:
- In the Cur Hop Limit field: the interface's configured
AdvCurHopLimit.
Notes:
The interface 's configured name of Cur Hop Limit is AdvCurHopLimit in the Section 6.2.1.