Re: [Idr] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8092 (4962)

Nick Hilliard <> Fri, 10 March 2017 20:36 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 601071294EF for <>; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 12:36:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EhNAApApx-AK for <>; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 12:36:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C0041294DA for <>; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 12:36:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from crumpet.local ( [] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v2AKafh8035994 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:36:42 GMT (envelope-from
X-Authentication-Warning: Host [] (may be forged) claimed to be crumpet.local
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:36:41 +0000
From: Nick Hilliard <>
User-Agent: Postbox 5.0.11 (Macintosh/20170302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "John G. Scudder" <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3
X-Company-Info-1: Internet Neutral Exchange Association Limited. Registered in Ireland No. 253804
X-Company-Info-2: Registered Offices: 1-2, Marino Mart, Fairview, Dublin 3
X-Company-Info-3: Internet Neutral Exchange Association Limited is limited by guarantee
X-Company-Info-4: Offices: 4027 Kingswood Road, Citywest, Dublin 24.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Cc:,, RFC Errata System <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8092 (4962)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:36:48 -0000

John G. Scudder wrote:
> I'm not so sure I agree with Alvaro that the case for the change is
> open-and-shut -- although he's right there are various other
> occurrences, there are also two other occurrences of the singular
> "Community" in the security section. If we're actually going to pick
> this nit, shouldn't the erratum cover all of them? Although in one
> case, changing to the plural would make the text exceedingly
> awkward.

"Community" vs "communities" was discussed at length during the
authorship process, and the term "language torture" was used in relation
to this specific point.  The root problem is that 1997 conflated the two
terms and we're left with an ambiguity about which term means what.

> I for one would support letting sleeping dogs lie, but whatever.

Please let's do this; the meaning is clear.  If there is a future
revision, it can be changed.