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

[Jacob Hoffman-Andrews <[e-mail]>]

I'm late to reply on this one, but a colleague brought this errata to me
attention.

It's a good change that increases clarity without changing the technical
meaning of the RFC. As an author I approve of it.

On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 3:29 PM Chris Smiley <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> 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 <
> [e-mail]> 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 <[e-mail]>
> >
> > 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
> >
>
>