IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6944 (4083)

Scott Rose <scottr.nist@gmail.com> Thu, 14 August 2014 16:47 UTC

Return-Path: <scottr.nist@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 594CB1A076B for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 09:47:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.633
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.633 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham
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 vBo6PssSKqaa for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 09:47:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wsget2.nist.gov (wsget2.nist.gov [129.6.13.151]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C82521A0460 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 09:47:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from WSXGHUB1.xchange.nist.gov (129.6.18.96) by wsget2.nist.gov (129.6.13.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 12:47:32 -0400
Received: from postmark.nist.gov (129.6.16.94) by WSXGHUB1.xchange.nist.gov (129.6.18.96) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.348.2; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 12:47:26 -0400
Received: from 6-140.antd.nist.gov (6-140.antd.nist.gov [129.6.140.6]) by postmark.nist.gov (8.13.8/8.13.1) with ESMTP id s7EGlHh4024179; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 12:47:17 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Scott Rose <scottr.nist@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140814155125.975A4180095@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 12:47:17 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <9D2277EF-2659-4C32-BF3A-B77B547C5E93@gmail.com>
References: <20140814155125.975A4180095@rfc-editor.org>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-NIST-MailScanner-Information:
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsext/VCnadXJPifgzkok5q5KO1W8x-jU
Cc: brian@innovationslab.net, dnsext@ietf.org, ted.lemon@nominum.com, bmoeller@acm.org, Olafur Gud <ogud@ogud.com>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6944 (4083)
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 16:47:29 -0000

I agree with adding the corrected text.

Scott Rose


On Aug 14, 2014, at 11:51 AM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:

> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6944,
> "Applicability Statement: DNS Security (DNSSEC) DNSKEY Algorithm Implementation Status".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6944&eid=4083
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Bodo Moeller <bmoeller@acm.org>
> 
> Section: 5.1
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> N/A
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> [RFC6605]  P. Hoffman, P., and Wijngaards, W.C.A., "Elliptic Curve
>    Digital Signature Algorithm (DSA) for DNSSEC", RFC 6605, 2012.
> 
> 
> Notes
> -----
> This Normative Reference is simply missing from the document, even though the algorithms from RFC 6605 are "Recommended to Implement" in RFC 6944.  (Cf. how RFC 5933 is referenced, even though its algorithms are merely optional.)
> 
> 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. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC6944 (draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-imp-status-04)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Applicability Statement: DNS Security (DNSSEC) DNSKEY Algorithm Implementation Status
> Publication Date    : April 2013
> Author(s)           : S. Rose
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : DNS Extensions
> Area                : Internet
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email