Re: [TLS] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6066 (5658)

Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com> Mon, 18 March 2024 04:43 UTC

From: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.15\))
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 14:43:14 +1000
References: <20190314193537.46170B820FF@rfc-editor.org>
To: TLS List <tls@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <20190314193537.46170B820FF@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <099E9F37-073B-438F-937C-755199436B9F@sn3rd.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/xb6XahP47pry_icdjOovt2eGEd8>
Subject: Re: [TLS] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6066 (5658)
Precedence: list

I suspect that this errata should be rejected.  RFC 6125 was published months after RFC 6066 and that makes this addition feel “new" to me and as such it’s inappropriate to change through the errata process; see [1].

spt

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-iesg-processing-of-rfc-errata-for-the-ietf-stream-20210507/

> On Mar 15, 2019, at 05:35, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6066,
> "Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions: Extension Definitions".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5658
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Owen Friel <ofriel@cisco.com>
> 
> Section: 3
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> 
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> When a client uses DNS SRV to discover and connect to a server, the 
> client SHOULD include the "source domain" in the "host_name" and SHOULD
> NOT include the "derived domain", where "source domain" and "derived
> domain" are defined in RFC6125. 
> 
> Notes
> -----
> The original text is all fine, but it is missing some additional clarifying text on use of SNI when a client users DNS SRV to discover the service it is connecting to.
> 
> 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. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC6066 (draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-12)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions: Extension Definitions
> Publication Date    : January 2011
> Author(s)           : D. Eastlake 3rd
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Transport Layer Security
> Area                : Security
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG

[TLS] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6066 (5658) RFC Errata System
Re: [TLS] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6066 (56… Sean Turner