Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5019 (5740)

Quoting from
https://www.ietf.org/blog/iesg-processing-rfc-errata-ietf-stream/:

5. Typographical errors which would not cause any confusions to
> implementation or deployments should be Hold for Document Update.




On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 10:25 PM Manger, James <
[email protected]> wrote:

> -1
> Reject (& delete) to discourage errata for such trivial typos.
> Now RFC5019 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5019) gets a red line at the
> top saying "Errata Exist", encouraging us to waste time reading a pointless
> errata page.
>
> --
> James Manger
> +61 4 1754 1870
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pkix <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Sean Turner
> Sent: Tuesday, 28 May 2019 12:58 PM
> To: Russ Housley <[email protected]>
> Cc: Roman Danyliw <[email protected]>; IETF PKIX <[email protected]>; Benjamin
> Kaduk <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [pkix] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5019 (5740)
>
> +1
>
> > On May 26, 2019, at 12:38, Russ Housley <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > I do not think an implementer will be confused here.  So, I suggest
> "hold for future update".
> >
> > Russ
> >
> >
> >> On May 25, 2019, at 11:11 PM, RFC Errata System <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5019, "The
> >> Lightweight Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP) Profile for
> High-Volume Environments".
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> You may review the report below and at:
> >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5740
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> Type: Editorial
> >> Reported by: Jaime Hablutzel <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> Section: 2.2.1
> >>
> >> Original Text
> >> -------------
> >> In the case where a responder does not have the ability to respond to
> >> an OCSP request containing a option not supported by the server, it
> >> SHOULD return the most complete response it can.
> >>
> >>
> >> Corrected Text
> >> --------------
> >> In the case where a responder does not have the ability to respond to
> >> an OCSP request containing an option not supported by the server, it
> >> SHOULD return the most complete response it can.
> >>
> >> Notes
> >> -----
> >> "a option" should be "an option"
> >>
> >> 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 can log in to change
> >> the status and edit the report, if necessary.
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> RFC5019 (draft-ietf-pkix-lightweight-ocsp-profile-11)
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> Title               : The Lightweight Online Certificate Status
> Protocol (OCSP) Profile for High-Volume Environments
> >> Publication Date    : September 2007
> >> Author(s)           : A. Deacon, R. Hurst
> >> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> >> Source              : Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509)
> >> Area                : Security
> >> Stream              : IETF
> >> Verifying Party     : IESG
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> pkix mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > pkix mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkix mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkix mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix
>


-- 
Jaime Hablutzel -  RPC 994690880

_______________________________________________
pkix mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix