Re: [lamps] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8659 (7139)

Chris Smiley <csmiley@amsl.com> Mon, 26 September 2022 22:29 UTC

Return-Path: <csmiley@amsl.com>
X-Original-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 489AFC14F743 for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 15:29:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.907
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 QJQ7Sk-KROXl for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 15:29:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c8a.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) (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 8EEB0C14CEFC for <spasm@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 15:29:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61F4C425A375; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 15:29:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N4QTuW4XLsQA; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 15:29:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.14] (cpe-76-95-228-63.socal.res.rr.com [76.95.228.63]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0F796425977A; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 15:29:43 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Chris Smiley <csmiley@amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220923194605.74B5B31761@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 15:29:42 -0700
Cc: brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com, phill@hallambaker.com, rob@sectigo.com, jsha@letsencrypt.org, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, spasm@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <567249B7-9F07-41B4-BE5E-9D1B774109EC@amsl.com>
References: <20220923194605.74B5B31761@rfcpa.amsl.com>
To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>, Paul Wouters <paul.wouters@aiven.io>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/LaxGtEN3KAy-ej82vc4tSIO9PjU>
Subject: Re: [lamps] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8659 (7139)
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is a venue for discussion of doing Some Pkix And SMime \(spasm\) work." <spasm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spasm/>
List-Post: <mailto:spasm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 22:29:47 -0000

Greetings,

We are unable to verify this erratum that the submitter marked as editorial.  
Please note that we have changed the “Type” of the following errata 
report to “Technical”.  As Stream Approver, please review and set the 
Status and Type accordingly (see the definitions at 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata-definitions/)

You may review the report at: 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7139

Please see https://www.rfc-editor.org/how-to-verify/ for further 
information on how to verify errata reports.

Further information on errata can be found at: 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.php.

Thank you.

RFC Editor/cs

> On Sep 23, 2022, at 12:46 PM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8659,
> "DNS Certification Authority Authorization (CAA) Resource Record".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7139
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>
> 
> Section: 4.2
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
>   parameters = (parameter *WSP ";" *WSP parameters) / parameter
>   parameter = tag *WSP "=" *WSP value
>   tag = (ALPHA / DIGIT) *( *("-") (ALPHA / DIGIT))
>   value = *(%x21-3A / %x3C-7E)
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>   parameters = (parameter *WSP ";" *WSP parameters) / parameter
>   parameter = parameter-tag *WSP "=" *WSP parameter-value
>   parameter-tag = (ALPHA / DIGIT) *( *("-") (ALPHA / DIGIT))
>   parameter-value = *(%x21-3A / %x3C-7E)
> 
> Notes
> -----
> 1. Original text uses "tag" and "value" in the ABNF is ambiguous or conflicting with the usage of "tag" and "value" in terms "Property Tag" and "Property Value" (which are in the main CAA context).
> 
> 2. The text for "tag" (meaning Property Tag) in 4.1.1 reads:
> 
>   Tag:  A non-zero-length sequence of ASCII letters and numbers in
>      lowercase.
> 
> 3. The Tag definition above does not have an ABNF definition. This can (and does) lead to confusion for implementers.
> 
> The above change to the ABNF removes the ambiguity, without changing the meaning of the ABNF itself.
> 
> 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. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC8659 (draft-ietf-lamps-rfc6844bis-07)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : DNS Certification Authority Authorization (CAA) Resource Record
> Publication Date    : November 2019
> Author(s)           : P. Hallam-Baker, R. Stradling, J. Hoffman-Andrews
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME
> Area                : Security
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>