[lamps] [Errata Verified] RFC9399 (7535)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 05 June 2023 21:10 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 1B6B9C14CE44; Mon, 5 Jun 2023 14:10:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.646
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.646 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, 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 m6vND7E7QSka; Mon, 5 Jun 2023 14:10:23 -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 32596C14CE54; Mon, 5 Jun 2023 14:10:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id BDBB67FDDA; Mon, 5 Jun 2023 14:10:22 -0700 (PDT)
To: preston@letsencrypt.org, sts@aaa-sec.com, housley@vigilsec.com, frtrevor@amazon.com, lrosenth@adobe.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: rfc-ed@rfc-editor.org, iesg@ietf.org, spasm@ietf.org, iana@iana.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20230605211022.BDBB67FDDA@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2023 14:10:22 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/lGCJ5FSKd48u1_MLTcPLSoKeNmg>
Subject: [lamps] [Errata Verified] 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 21:10:27 -0000
The following errata report has been verified 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 -------------------------------------- Status: Verified Type: Editorial Reported by: Preston Locke <preston@letsencrypt.org> Date Reported: 2023-06-05 Verified by: RFC Editor 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" -------------------------------------- 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
- [lamps] [Errata Verified] RFC9399 (7535) RFC Errata System