Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70ECA21F8771 for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 23:38:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.462 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.462 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.137, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V0DIBhMNoXz0 for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 23:38:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from M4.sparta.com (M4.sparta.com [157.185.61.2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D5ED21F8454 for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 23:38:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Beta5.sparta.com (beta5.sparta.com [157.185.63.21]) by M4.sparta.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q2R6cJTw012914; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 01:38:19 -0500 Received: from Hermes.columbia.ads.sparta.com ([157.185.80.107]) by Beta5.sparta.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2R6cIYL002437; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 01:38:18 -0500 Received: from HERMES.columbia.ads.sparta.com ([2002:9db9:506b::9db9:506b]) by Hermes.columbia.ads.sparta.com ([2002:9db9:506b::9db9:506b]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.002; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 02:38:18 -0400 From: "Murphy, Sandra" To: Geoff Huston , RFC Errata System Thread-Topic: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6487 (3168) Thread-Index: AQHNC5EHeM1SdhjBTEK0yND38V+CWpZ9wJKA///toZE= Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 06:38:17 +0000 Message-ID: <24B20D14B2CD29478C8D5D6E9CBB29F60F6CA9D7@Hermes.columbia.ads.sparta.com> References: <20120326204137.31F0BB1E003@rfc-editor.org>, In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.185.63.118] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "morrowc@ops-netman.net" , "sidr@ietf.org" , "ggm@apnic.net" Subject: Re: [sidr] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6487 (3168) X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 06:38:30 -0000 Thank you, Geoff. I agree.=0A= =0A= --Sandy=0A= =0A= ________________________________________=0A= From: Geoff Huston [gih@apnic.net]=0A= Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 11:33 PM=0A= To: RFC Errata System=0A= Cc: ggm@apnic.net; robertl@apnic.net; stbryant@cisco.com; adrian@olddog.co.= uk; Murphy, Sandra; morrowc@ops-netman.net; dmandelb@bbn.com; sidr@ietf.org= =0A= Subject: Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6487 (3168)=0A= =0A= > This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please=0A= > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or=0A= > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)=0A= > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.=0A= =0A= =0A= verified.=0A= =0A= Geoff=0A= =0A= =0A= On 27/03/2012, at 7:41 AM, RFC Errata System wrote:=0A= =0A= >=0A= > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6487,=0A= > "A Profile for X.509 PKIX Resource Certificates".=0A= >=0A= > --------------------------------------=0A= > You may review the report below and at:=0A= > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D6487&eid=3D3168=0A= >=0A= > --------------------------------------=0A= > Type: Technical=0A= > Reported by: David Mandelberg =0A= >=0A= > Section: 4.8=0A= >=0A= > Original Text=0A= > -------------=0A= > or non-critical. A certificate-using system MUST reject the=0A= > certificate if it encounters a critical extension it does not=0A= > recognize; however, a non-critical extension MAY be ignored if it is=0A= > not recognized [RFC5280].=0A= >=0A= > Corrected Text=0A= > --------------=0A= > or non-critical. A certificate-using system MUST reject the=0A= > certificate if it encounters an extension not explicitly mentioned=0A= > in this document. This is in contrast to RFC 5280 which allows=0A= > non-critical extensions to be ignored.=0A= >=0A= > Notes=0A= > -----=0A= > Other sections of the same document contradict the original section 4.8:= =0A= >=0A= > Section 1:=0A= >=0A= > Any extensions not explicitly mentioned MUST be absent. The same=0A= > applies to the CRLs used in the RPKI, that are also profiled in this=0A= > document.=0A= >=0A= > Section 8:=0A= >=0A= > Certificate Extensions:=0A= > This profile does not permit the use of any other critical or=0A= > non-critical extensions.=0A= >=0A= > Instructions:=0A= > -------------=0A= > This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please=0A= > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or=0A= > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)=0A= > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.=0A= >=0A= > --------------------------------------=0A= > RFC6487 (draft-ietf-sidr-res-certs-22)=0A= > --------------------------------------=0A= > Title : A Profile for X.509 PKIX Resource Certificates=0A= > Publication Date : February 2012=0A= > Author(s) : G. Huston, G. Michaelson, R. Loomans=0A= > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD=0A= > Source : Secure Inter-Domain Routing=0A= > Area : Routing=0A= > Stream : IETF=0A= > Verifying Party : IESG=0A= =0A= --=0A= =0A= Geoff Huston=0A= Chief Scientist, APNIC=0A= =0A= +61 7 3858 3100=0A= gih@apnic.net=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A=