Re: [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6891 (6982)

Ólafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com> Mon, 30 May 2022 08:33 UTC

In-Reply-To: <20220529231005.70BED3BA83@rfcpa.amsl.com>
References: <20220529231005.70BED3BA83@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Thread-Topic: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6891 (6982)
User-Agent: Android
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----74V887DCXI7HL6OPAQ01GS2WNWLSL0"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Ólafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2022 10:33:45 +0200
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
CC: João Luis Silva Damas <joao@bondis.org>, explorer@flame.org, vixie@isc.org, ek.ietf@gmail.com, evyncke@cisco.com, ajs@anvilwalrusden.com, contact@avnindersran.com, dnsext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <8fe685c4-1d1d-4f6c-91e6-70dbc68f3aa4@ogud.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsext/9uScNgJAka3h1vXjZnVpifxGjN0>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6891 (6982)
Precedence: list

Reject octets is the correct term.



⁣Get BlueMail for Android 

On May 30, 2022, 01:10, at 01:10, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6891,
>"Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS(0))".
>
>--------------------------------------
>You may review the report below and at:
>https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6982
>
>--------------------------------------
>Type: Technical
>Reported by: Avninder Sran <contact@avnindersran.com>
>
>Section: 4.3
>
>Original Text
>-------------
>Traditional DNS messages are limited to 512 octets in size when sent
>over UDP [RFC1035]. Fitting the increasing amounts of data that can be
>transported in DNS in this 512-byte limit is becoming more difficult.
>For instance, inclusion of DNSSEC records frequently requires a much
>larger response than a 512-byte message can hold.
>
>Corrected Text
>--------------
>Traditional DNS messages are limited to 512-bytes in size when sent
>over UDP [RFC1035]. Fitting the increasing amounts of data that can be
>transported in DNS in this 512-byte limit is becoming more difficult.
>For instance, inclusion of DNSSEC records frequently
> requires a much larger response than a 512-byte message can hold.
>
>Notes
>-----
>In the original text, it says: DNS messages are limited to 512 octets
>in size, but it should be 512 bytes not octets.
>
>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. 
>
>--------------------------------------
>RFC6891 (draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0-10)
>--------------------------------------
>Title               : Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS(0))
>Publication Date    : April 2013
>Author(s)           : J. Damas, M. Graff, P. Vixie
>Category            : INTERNET STANDARD
>Source              : DNS Extensions
>Area                : Internet
>Stream              : IETF
>Verifying Party     : IESG

[dnsext] [Errata Rejected] RFC6891 (6982) RFC Errata System
Re: [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6891 … Ólafur Gudmundsson