[v6ops] [Errata Rejected] RFC6555 (6745)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 15 January 2024 19:15 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87CD4C14F6B7; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:15:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.658
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.658 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 i_vro3SqD_s3; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:15:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (rfcpa.amsl.com [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 B810FC14F68E; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:15:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id A43D01A49953; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:15:45 -0800 (PST)
To: mmenke@google.com, dwing-ietf@fuggles.com, ayourtch@cisco.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: warren@kumari.net, iesg@ietf.org, v6ops@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20240115191545.A43D01A49953@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:15:45 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/tr2iftC7Gf8SwSESxr5zEN8P0x8>
Subject: [v6ops] [Errata Rejected] RFC6555 (6745)
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 19:15:49 -0000
The following errata report has been rejected for RFC6555, "Happy Eyeballs: Success with Dual-Stack Hosts". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6745 -------------------------------------- Status: Rejected Type: Technical Reported by: Matthew Menke <mmenke@google.com> Date Reported: 2021-11-19 Rejected by: Warren Kumari (Ops AD) (IESG) Section: 5.6 Original Text ------------- Web browsers implement a same-origin policy [RFC6454] that causes subsequent connections to the same hostname to go to the same IPv4 (or IPv6) address as the previous successful connection. This is done to prevent certain types of attacks. The same-origin policy harms user-visible responsiveness if a new connection fails (e.g., due to a transient event such as router failure or load-balancer failure). While it is tempting to use Happy Eyeballs to maintain responsiveness, web browsers MUST NOT change their same-origin policy because of Happy Eyeballs, as that would create an additional security exposure. Corrected Text -------------- <This section should be removed> Notes ----- This entire section should be deleted. Same-Origin policy has nothing to do with what IP connections to the same hostname go to. Two connections to the same host are same origin even if they're using different IPs. Happy Eyeballs is free to use whatever IP for a hostname it wants for an origin, and Same-Origin policy will not be violated. [ Edit (WK) ]: I am rejecting this Errata because this RFC has been Obsoleted by RFC8305 - "Happy Eyeballs Version 2: Better Connectivity Using Concurrency", which does not contain this text. --VERIFIER NOTES-- -------------------------------------- RFC6555 (draft-ietf-v6ops-happy-eyeballs-07) -------------------------------------- Title : Happy Eyeballs: Success with Dual-Stack Hosts Publication Date : April 2012 Author(s) : D. Wing, A. Yourtchenko Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : IPv6 Operations Area : Operations and Management Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [v6ops] [Errata Rejected] RFC6555 (6745) RFC Errata System