RFC Errata


Errata Search

 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 2 records.

Status: Reported (1)

RFC 7719, "DNS Terminology", December 2015

Source of RFC: dnsop (ops)

Errata ID: 5542
Status: Reported
Type: Technical

Reported By: Scott Corcoran
Date Reported: 2018-11-03

Section 1 says:

https://specs.webplatform.org/url/webspecs/develop

It should say:


https://webplatform.github.io/


Notes:

The RFC should be edited to reflect the intended content. Unfortunately, although I am technical, I do not have knowledge of the original. There are also other dead references.... and a reference to a "dead project" which is still living, here, but with little reference to DNS or domains.

Status: Rejected (1)

RFC 7719, "DNS Terminology", December 2015

Source of RFC: dnsop (ops)

Errata ID: 4611
Status: Rejected
Type: Technical

Reported By: Nikolai Malykh
Date Reported: 2016-02-02
Rejected by: Joel Jaeggli
Date Rejected: 2017-03-29

Section 2 says:

CNAME:  "It is traditional to refer to the owner of a CNAME record as
   'a CNAME'.  This is unfortunate, as 'CNAME' is an abbreviation of
   'canonical name', and the owner of a CNAME record is most certainly
   not a canonical name."  (Quoted from [RFC2181], Section 10.1.1)

It should say:

CNAME:  "It is traditional to refer to the label of a CNAME record as
   'a CNAME'.  This is unfortunate, as 'CNAME' is an abbreviation of
   'canonical name', and the label of a CNAME record is an alias, not
   a canonical name."  (Quoted from [RFC2181], Section 10.1.1)

Notes:

Incorrect quote from RFC 2181.
--VERIFIER NOTES--
Not a technical erratum.

is corrected already in

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05

which should be examined for consistency

Report New Errata