Last erratum last call (was: Upcoming new test-suite release)

> I think I can come up with a proposal for the three choices:

> PermError => add note that this is about a syntactically invalid
>              <target-name> for DNS, for example adjacent dots.

> No match  => say that the 2.5.7 statement was wrong and should
>              be ignored, reflecting common "no match" practice.

> Pick      => say that some implementations skip a syntactically
>              invalid DNS <target-name>, e.g., adjacent dots.
[...]

> you could still change your mind

Nobody made new noises in this direction, therefore I edited
the "last erratum" to say "no match".  Please check that the
proposed text says what you want:

http://www.openspf.org/RFC_4408/Errata#permerror-invalid-domains

I'd like to have a "the old Council would have decided" voice
from Alex or Scott, or a "the community clearly prefers" voice
from somebody who is neither Ale nor Terry.  Or to make things
more interesting everybody can of course change their mind. ;-)

Word smithing, stylistic issues, go for it.  If nothing special
happens this section will be moved to "confirmed" in the next
days.

 Frank