[Idna-update] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5890 (7291)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 26 December 2022 17:52 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com>
X-Original-To: idna-update@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idna-update@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 346F4C14CE29 for <idna-update@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 09:52:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.981
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.981 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rlshddL0RxyE for <idna-update@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 09:52:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.alvestrand.no (smtp.alvestrand.no [65.21.189.24]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5B62C14CE28 for <idna-update@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 09:52:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by smtp.alvestrand.no (Postfix) id 2D15F4480C; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 18:52:49 +0100 (CET)
Delivered-To: idna-update@alvestrand.no
Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=50.223.129.200; helo=rfcpa.amsl.com; envelope-from=wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com; receiver=<UNKNOWN>
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (rfc-editor.org [50.223.129.200]) by smtp.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 010DF44808 for <idna-update@alvestrand.no>; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 18:52:47 +0100 (CET)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id 94FC3AFB68; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 09:52:45 -0800 (PST)
To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: john-ietf@jck.com, john+ietf@jck.com, idna-update@alvestrand.no
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20221226175245.94FC3AFB68@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2022 09:52:45 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idna-update/hGKfVhmlxrKDhcVLu6FnH_aKixY>
Subject: [Idna-update] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5890 (7291)
X-BeenThere: idna-update@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Internationalized Domain Names in Applications \(IDNA\) implementation and update discussions" <idna-update.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idna-update>, <mailto:idna-update-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idna-update/>
List-Post: <mailto:idna-update@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idna-update-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idna-update>, <mailto:idna-update-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2022 17:52:55 -0000
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5890, "Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7291 -------------------------------------- Type: Editorial Reported by: John Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Section: GLOBAL Original Text ------------- Request for Comments: 5890 Obsoletes: 3490 Category: Standards Track Corrected Text -------------- Request for Comments: 5890 Obsoletes: 3490 Updates: 4343 Category: Standards Track Notes ----- I have no idea whether this correction is Editorial or Technical , nor what to use as a Section indication. However... RFC 5890 (or IDNA2008 more generally), should have updated RFC 4343 and the IDN discussion in its Section 5. The latter references the IDNA2003 documents and makes some statements that are, at best, confusing in the context of IDNA2008. See the extended notes for RFC 4343 in https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7290 for more discussion and details. Recommendation: Hold for document update unless this appears to anyone to be a serious problem, in which case a separate RFC, using the notes on Errata ID 7290 as a starting point, may be in order. 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. -------------------------------------- RFC5890 (draft-ietf-idnabis-defs-13) -------------------------------------- Title : Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework Publication Date : August 2010 Author(s) : J. Klensin Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Internationalized Domain Names in Applications (Revised) Area : Applications Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [Idna-update] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5890… RFC Errata System
- Re: [Idna-update] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Idna-update] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC… Chris Smiley