[CFRG] Proposed CFRG process for handling errata

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Thu, 24 December 2020 10:25 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 770303A116A for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 02:25:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isode.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nrpxAp8Rg9S8 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 02:25:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from statler.isode.com (Statler.isode.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E02A43A1168 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 02:25:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1608805546; d=isode.com; s=june2016; i=@isode.com; bh=0J8YcwSvGXlOkcx7190DxcdIkYDDElhHlKE+8dhgbZQ=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=HdkxVz3VLbv5KWkE3SvRznlWklTOABUr9rgpobxMC/EKATC5n35SJlvcY9QkT7PcnnK6ta Zcp6ahxlJw3R9HfBXbaCbsqQPSkgDMzKulGvFhqRkIIZs+YJOCh0Lh5T0D7egn6jxiIHBp dq0Y6uDlNmRsRL8X/NCRkVpo6h/E9ec=;
Received: from [] (host31-49-142-22.range31-49.btcentralplus.com []) by statler.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <X-RsqgBqmisK@statler.isode.com>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 10:25:46 +0000
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
To: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Cc: "cfrg-chairs@ietf.org" <cfrg-chairs@ietf.org>
References: <40067f90-ec2c-2a36-f6df-8afa97189cd1@isode.com>
Message-ID: <47855176-ce02-07b2-3f78-6f373c6f118d@isode.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 10:25:30 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0
In-Reply-To: <40067f90-ec2c-2a36-f6df-8afa97189cd1@isode.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/CF1KuRSLBoyKC4etM_d8OXrCwm4>
Subject: [CFRG] Proposed CFRG process for handling errata
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 10:25:50 -0000

Dear CFRG participants,

Below is the proposed process that CFRG chairs would follow when 
handling errata submitted on CFRG documents.

Please let chairs know by January 16th if you have comments or concerns. 
Statements of support for this proposal are also welcome.

An erratum is submitted through www.rfc-editor.org website An erratum on 
a CFRG document results in email to irsg@irtf.org (+authors/editors of 
the RFC) with subject like "[Technical Errata Reported] RFCXXXX (YYYY)", 
where XXXX is the relevant RFC number and YYYY is the corresponding 
erratum number (assigned automatically by RFC Editor's website).

Note that the current errata system is not designed for reporting of 
extensions and things that were not known or intended at the time the 
document was written. It is only designed for reporting problems/bugs in 

One of CFRG chairs becomes the response CFRG chair for the erratum. 
He/she verifies that the erratum designation (Technical versa Editorial) 
is correct. (Note that the designation can be changed later and it is Ok 
if initially it is unclear for some errata which one it is.) The CFRG 
chair can also request deletion of obviously bogus erratum, such as 
submitted by spammers.

The CFRG chair then can optionally request review from the Crypto Review 
Panel <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/irtf/wiki/Crypto%20Review%20Panel>, by 
emailing crypto-panel@irtf.org and asking for comments on how to resolve 
the erratum. A proposed resolution can be suggested, if available. The 
request should specify a deadline, typically 2 weeks. This deadline can 
be extended by request from Crypto Review Panel members. Note that 
feedback from Crypto Review Panel is advisory in nature.

The CFRG chair then emails the CFRG mailing list <cfrg@irtf.org> asking 
for comments on how to resolve the erratum. (Possible subject to use: 
"Proposed resolution for erratum YYYY on RFC XXXX") A proposed 
resolution can be suggested, if available. The proposed resolution takes 
into consideration feedback received from the Crypto Review Panel (if 
requested). The request should specify a recommended deadline for 

The CFRG chair follows the CFRG mailing list discussion of the erratum 
resolution and posts a summary email after the deadline expires. If 
there is a clear resolution ("accept", "reject" or "hold for document 
update") the suggested resolution (and possible changes to the erratum 
text) are included in the summary email. The IRTF Chair should be 
notified about the proposed resolution for the erratum.

The IRTF Chair verifies outcome of the process and either acts on the 
erratum as proposed by the CFRG chair or delegates this decision to 
another person (who might be the CFRG chair). (The IRTF chair can 
provide technical feedback on the erratum in his/her personal capacity. 
The IRTF Chair can also restart discussion of the erratum on the CFRG 
mailing list.)


Best Regards,

Alexey, for the CFRG chairs