From nobody Mon Aug 1 17:08:37 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92A6112B038 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 17:08:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.889 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.889 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2NC_Ijou7dET for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 17:08:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2ED51128E19 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 17:08:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 20445B806A1; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 17:08:35 -0700 (PDT) To: marcelo@it.uc3m.es, philip_matthews@magma.ca, iljitsch@muada.com, spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com, ietf@kuehlewind.net, dwing@cisco.com, dthaler@microsoft.com X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20160802000835.20445B806A1@rfc-editor.org> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 17:08:35 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: Cc: ydahhrk@gmail.com, behave@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [BEHAVE] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6146 (4756) X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 00:08:36 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6146, "Stateful NAT64: Network Address and Protocol Translation from IPv6 Clients to IPv4 Servers". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6146&eid=4756 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Alberto Leiva Popper Section: 3.5.3 Original Text ------------- If the NAT64 filters on its IPv4 interface, then the NAT64 checks to see if the incoming packet is allowed according to the Address- Dependent Filtering rule. To do this, it searches for a Session Table Entry with an STE source IPv4 address equal to X, an STE ICMPv4 Identifier equal to i2, and a STE destination IPv4 address equal to Y. If such an entry is found (there may be more than one), packet processing continues. Otherwise, the packet is discarded. If the packet is discarded, then an ICMP error message MAY be sent to the original sender of the packet. The ICMP error message, if sent, has Type 3 (Destination Unreachable) and Code 13 (Communication Administratively Prohibited). In case the packet is not discarded in the previous processing steps (either because the NAT64 is not filtering or because the packet is compliant with the Address-Dependent Filtering rule), then the NAT64 searches for a Session Table Entry (...) Corrected Text -------------- The NAT64 then searches for a Session Table Entry (...) Notes ----- The statement "there may be more than one" is incorrect; the triplet (X,i2,Y) constitutes the whole ICMP session's v4 identifier. Considering that, the whole paragraph tends to fall apart. The point of Address-Dependent Filtering (ADF) is to provide a means to allow or disallow IPv4-started "sibling" connections. If there is an ongoing connection whose binding state is BIB entry: (*,*) <--> (T,t) Session: (*,*),(*,*) <--> (T,t),(Z,z) (Left side is v6, right side is v4. This is the same notation as the RFC; see for example https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6146#section-3.5.1; '*' is anything/irrelevant) Then ADF dictates whether the v4 endpoint is allowed to create the following new session (using the same BIB entry): Session: (*,*),(*,*) <--> (T,t),(Z,m) (where 'z' is not equal to 'm') ADF works in UDP/TCP because t and z/m are separate variables. This is not the case in ICMP: BIB entry: (*,*) <--> (T,t) Session: (*,*,*) <--> (T,t,Z) If only one ICMP triplet can match, there is no room for "sibling" ICMP "connections" that share a "source" IPv4 identifier but not a "destination" IPv4 identifier like TCP and UDP do. The two pings will share both BIB entry and v4 endpoint address and therefore also share the session. The NAT64 is incapable of telling the two pings apart, and therefore cannot filter one of them. There is no such thing as "Address-Dependent Filtering" on ICMP. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC6146 (draft-ietf-behave-v6v4-xlate-stateful-12) -------------------------------------- Title : Stateful NAT64: Network Address and Protocol Translation from IPv6 Clients to IPv4 Servers Publication Date : April 2011 Author(s) : M. Bagnulo, P. Matthews, I. van Beijnum Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Behavior Engineering for Hindrance Avoidance Area : Transport Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From nobody Thu Aug 11 17:58:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1986512D906 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 17:58:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.869 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.869 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id THw4ylo1w9nC for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 17:58:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CBEA12D8F3 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 17:58:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 0E5D2B80ACA; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 17:58:38 -0700 (PDT) To: remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com, spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com, ietf@kuehlewind.net, dwing@cisco.com, dthaler@microsoft.com X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20160812005838.0E5D2B80ACA@rfc-editor.org> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 17:58:38 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: Cc: behave@ietf.org, block.rxckin.beats@gmail.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [BEHAVE] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5769 (4776) X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 00:58:40 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5769, "Test Vectors for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5769&eid=4776 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: software should include manufacturer and version number Section: 2 Original Text ------------- 2.1. Sample Request This request uses the following parameters: Software name: "STUN test client" (without quotes) Corrected Text -------------- 2.1. Sample Request This request uses the following parameters: Software name: "STUN-test-client@v0.0.0" (without quotes) Notes ----- https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5389#section-15.10 says that Its value SHOULD include manufacturer and version number. so test vector of SOFTWARE at 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 should include this. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC5769 (draft-ietf-behave-stun-test-vectors-04) -------------------------------------- Title : Test Vectors for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Publication Date : April 2010 Author(s) : R. Denis-Courmont Category : INFORMATIONAL Source : Behavior Engineering for Hindrance Avoidance Area : Transport Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG