RFC Errata


Errata Search
 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 2 records.

Status: Verified (2)

RFC 8272, "TinyIPFIX for Smart Meters in Constrained Networks", November 2017

Source of RFC: INDEPENDENT

Errata ID: 5959
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Corinna Schmitt
Date Reported: 2020-01-20
Verifier Name: Adrian Farrel
Date Verified: 2020-01-26

Section 6.1 says: 

Value = 15; look up extended SetID field, shifting enabled.

It should say:

Value = 15; look up extended SetID field, Shifting disabled.

Notes:

Typo error identified by RFC authors during new implementation in RIOT OS.

Errata ID: 5782
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Gernot Vormayr
Date Reported: 2019-07-15
Verifier Name: Adrian Farrel
Date Verified: 2019-07-17

Section 6.1 says: 

     0                   1                   2                   3
     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |E|E| SetID |        Length     | Sequence      | Ext. Sequenz  |
    |1|2|Lookup |                   | Number        |  Number       |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Figure 9: TinyIPFIX Message Header Format if E1 = 0 and E2 = 1

     0                   1                   2                   3
     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |1|1| SetID |        Length     | Sequence      | Ext. Sequenz  |
    | | |Lookup |                   | Number        |  Number       |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    | Ext. SetID    |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Figure 10: TinyIPFIX Message Header Format if E1 = E2 = 1

It should say:

     0                   1                   2                   3
     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |0|1| SetID |        Length     | Sequence      | Ext. Sequence |
    | | |Lookup |                   | Number        |  Number       |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Figure 9: TinyIPFIX Message Header Format if E1 = 0 and E2 = 1

     0                   1                   2                   3
     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |1|1| SetID |        Length     | Sequence      | Ext. Sequence |
    | | |Lookup |                   | Number        |  Number       |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    | Ext. SetID    |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Figure 10: TinyIPFIX Message Header Format if E1 = E2 = 1

Notes:

Figure 9: In Figures 7,8,10 E1 and E2 is replaced with the actual values (can be seen in Figure 10 in the submission; 1,1), while in Figure 9 this was missed (probably copy-paste-error): Is E1, E2; should be 0, 1

Figure 9 and Figure 10: In the rest of the RFC and all the other figures, the field is called "Ext. Sequence Number" and not "Ext. Sequenz Number" (Looks like a translation error).

Report New Errata



Advanced Search