IETF Logo Mail Archive

[tsvwg] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8085 (7106)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 31 August 2022 09:46 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF79AC14CF12 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 02:46:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.659
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.659 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 sp_klRc3Unzz for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 02:46:06 -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 EE392C14F73D for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 02:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id 86C2E961F3; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 02:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: adam.w@sasktel.net, lars@netapp.com, gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk, gjshep@gmail.com, tsvwg@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20220831094606.86C2E961F3@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 02:46:06 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/MjptuQ88YWY1GZdi5PAADVhZ80M>
Subject: [tsvwg] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8085 (7106)
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 09:46:10 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8085,
"UDP Usage Guidelines".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7106

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Adam Wall <adam.w@sasktel.net>

Section: 3.4

Original Text
-------------
More description of the set of checks performed using the checksum field is provided in Section 3.1 of [RFC6396].

Corrected Text
--------------
More description of the set of checks performed using the checksum field is provided in Section 3.1 of [RFC6936].

Notes
-----
The wrong RFC was referenced under "Checksum Guidelines" Section 3.4, including the same wrong RFC information within the "Informative References" Section 8.2.

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. 

--------------------------------------
RFC8085 (draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc5405bis-19)
--------------------------------------
Title               : UDP Usage Guidelines
Publication Date    : March 2017
Author(s)           : L. Eggert, G. Fairhurst, G. Shepherd
Category            : BEST CURRENT PRACTICE
Source              : Transport Area Working Group
Area                : Transport
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email