[Idr] Re: [sidr] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8209 (8653)

Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.ietf@gmail.com> Sat, 22 November 2025 07:01 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20251121122823.60D2EC000CC0@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org> <568B4AFA-195F-45C3-836C-1B3FEFF938B0@bgp.nu>
In-Reply-To: <568B4AFA-195F-45C3-836C-1B3FEFF938B0@bgp.nu>
From: Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2025 12:31:33 +0530
Message-ID: <CAH6gdPyk8idkJ=shmvh3+QLf5ERxhn2qSCYFBjairH5LQQ9Kgw@mail.gmail.com>
To: job@bsd.nl, sean@sn3rd.com, kent@alum.mit.edu
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d7c9d80644298008"
Message-ID-Hash: TE4MBWXKP66WVR2TZRASWHYQI3WVRSMW
CC: mcr@islandpeaksoftware.com, gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com, morrowc@ops-netman.net, sidr@ietf.org, SIDRops IETF <sidrops@ietf.org>, "idr@ietf. org" <idr@ietf.org>
Precedence: list
Subject: [Idr] Re: [sidr] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8209 (8653)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/WTiyN-KHXBbT_NjmZzrwiA3TptQ>

+ SIDROPS and IDR as well

I agree and I am inclined towards marking this erratum as HFDU.

If anyone feels otherwise, please let me know by EOD Nov 26th.

Thanks,
Ketan


On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 7:19 PM John G. Scudder <jgs@bgp.nu> wrote:

> This seems perfectly reasonable to me but also, on its face, beyond the
> scope of an erratum [1], other than “hold for document update”. On the
> other hand, it seems very sensible as a one-page RFC updating 8209.
>
> —John
>
> [1]
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-iesg-processing-of-rfc-errata-for-the-ietf-stream-20210507/
>
> On Nov 21, 2025, at 7:28 AM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
> wrote:
>
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8209,
> "A Profile for BGPsec Router Certificates, Certificate Revocation Lists,
> and Certification Requests".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8653
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Job Snijders <job@bsd.nl>
>
> Section: 3.1.1
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> Encoding options for the common name that are supported are
> printableString and UTF8String.
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> The common name attribute is encoded as PrintableString (RFC 6487, Section
> 4.5).
>
> Notes
> -----
> In all other RPKI object profiles a restricted character string type
> (PrintableString) is used in both issuer & subject name attributes, with
> the exception of the BGPsec certificate profile where an unjustified
> exception seems to have slipped in. In this context it is an unnecessary
> complication for implementers to have to make special accommodations for
> multibyte characters in some aspects of the BGPsec certificate profile.
>
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is spam, it
> will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
> will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC8209 (draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles-21)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : A Profile for BGPsec Router Certificates,
> Certificate Revocation Lists, and Certification Requests
> Publication Date    : September 2017
> Author(s)           : M. Reynolds, S. Turner, S. Kent
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Secure Inter-Domain Routing
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list -- sidr@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to sidr-leave@ietf.org
>
>

[Idr] Re: [sidr] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8… Ketan Talaulikar