[lamps] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9399 (7535)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 05 June 2023 17:32 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.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 DAE0EC152F1A for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Jun 2023 10:32:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.647
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, 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 pYfNBVsGO8YS for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Jun 2023 10:32:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (rfc-editor.org [50.223.129.200]) (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 05C84C151997 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Jun 2023 10:32:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id B73627FDDA; Mon, 5 Jun 2023 10:32:52 -0700 (PDT)
To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: preston@letsencrypt.org, sts@aaa-sec.com, housley@vigilsec.com, frtrevor@amazon.com, lrosenth@adobe.com, spasm@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20230605173252.B73627FDDA@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2023 10:32:52 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/NtcSyOg6f5uKZrMD4zxbgwcsAjg>
Subject: [lamps] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9399 (7535)
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, 05 Jun 2023 17:32:57 -0000
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9399, "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure: Logotypes in X.509 Certificates". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7535 -------------------------------------- Type: Editorial Reported by: Preston Locke <preston@letsencrypt.org> Section: 6 Original Text ------------- Consequently, if relying party software accepts a CA, then it should be prepared to (unquestioningly) display the associated logotypes to its human user, given that it is configured to do so. Information about the logotypes is provided so that the replying party software can select the one that will best meet the needs of the human user. This choice depends on the abilities of the human user, as well as the capabilities of the platform on which the replaying party software is running. Corrected Text -------------- Consequently, if relying party software accepts a CA, then it should be prepared to (unquestioningly) display the associated logotypes to its human user, given that it is configured to do so. Information about the logotypes is provided so that the relying party software can select the one that will best meet the needs of the human user. This choice depends on the abilities of the human user, as well as the capabilities of the platform on which the relying party software is running. Notes ----- The phrases "replying party" and "replaying party" are typos and should be "relying party" 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. -------------------------------------- RFC9399 (draft-ietf-lamps-rfc3709bis-10) -------------------------------------- Title : Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure: Logotypes in X.509 Certificates Publication Date : May 2023 Author(s) : S. Santesson, R. Housley, T. Freeman, L. Rosenthol Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME Area : Security Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [lamps] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9399 (7535) RFC Errata System
- Re: [lamps] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9399 (… Tim Hollebeek