[apps-discuss] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7601 (4671)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 18 April 2016 16:06 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05EC712E1C8 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 09:06:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -107.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, 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 XkC0hCA3kN2M for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 09:06:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1900:3001:11::31]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEDC212E1A8 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 09:06:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id AAE0318000F; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 09:05:54 -0700 (PDT)
To: superuser@gmail.com, ben@nostrum.com, alissa@cooperw.in, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, superuser@gmail.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20160418160554.AAE0318000F@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 09:05:54 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/WdCcNUJxMPnGyJ8MJ13A4oWTRbE>
Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org, vesely@tana.it
Subject: [apps-discuss] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7601 (4671)
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/apps-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 16:06:24 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7601,
"Message Header Field for Indicating Message Authentication Status".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7601&eid=4671

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Ale <vesely@tana.it>

Section: 2.3

Original Text
-------------
   The "ptype" in the ABNF above indicates the general type of property
   being described by the result being reported, upon which the reported
   result was based.  Coupled with the "property", which is more
   specific, they indicate from which particular part of the message the
   reported data were extracted.



Corrected Text
--------------
   The "ptype" in the ABNF above indicates the general type of property
   being described by the value being reported, upon which the reported
   result was based.  Coupled with the "property", which is more
   specific, they indicate from which particular part of the message the
   reported "pvalue"s were extracted.



Notes
-----
The original text can be understood in multiple ways, depending on the meaning attributed to the term "result".  The corrected text I submit is one of the possible interpretations.  Note that if the first appearance of the term is assumed to be the ABNF "result", then ptype becomes an attribute of method, thereby setting a limit of one ptype per resinfo, as coincidentally it actually is.

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. 

--------------------------------------
RFC7601 (draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis-11)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Message Header Field for Indicating Message Authentication Status
Publication Date    : August 2015
Author(s)           : M. Kucherawy
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : ART Area General Application Working Group
Area                : Applications and Real-Time
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG