errata logo graphic

Found 1 record.

Status: Held for Document Update (1)

RFC4524, "COSINE LDAP/X.500 Schema", June 2006

Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUP
Area Assignment: app

Errata ID: 68

Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2006-07-07
Held for Document Update by: Peter Saint-Andre

 

(1)  referential inconsistency

The second paragraph of Section 1, on page 3 of RFC 4524, says:

   In the years that followed, X.500 Directory Services have evolved to
   incorporate new capabilities and even new protocols.  In particular,
   the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) [RFC4510] was
   introduced in the early 1990s [RFC1487], with Version 3 of LDAP
   introduced in the late 1990s [RFC2251] and subsequently revised in
|  2005 [RFC4510].

It should say:

   In the years that followed, X.500 Directory Services have evolved to
   incorporate new capabilities and even new protocols.  In particular,
   the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) [RFC4510] was
   introduced in the early 1990s [RFC1487], with Version 3 of LDAP
   introduced in the late 1990s [RFC2251] and subsequently revised in
|  2006 [RFC4510].
      ^

(Rationale: RFC 451x and RFC 452x have been published in June 2006.)


(2)  typos

(2a) The third paragraph of Section 1, on page 3 of RFC 4524, says:

|  While much of the material in RFC 1274 has been superceded by
   subsequently published ITU-T Recommendations and IETF RFCs, [...]

It should say:
                                                        v
|  While much of the material in RFC 1274 has been superseded by
   subsequently published ITU-T Recommendations and IETF RFCs, [...]

(2b) The third paragraph of Section 1.1, on page 3, says:

   The description of the 'domain' object class provided in this
|  document supercedes that found in RFC 2247.  That is, Section 3.4 of
   this document replaces Section 5.2 of [RFC2247].

It should say:

   The description of the 'domain' object class provided in this
|  document supersedes that found in RFC 2247.  That is, Section 3.4 of
   this document replaces Section 5.2 of [RFC2247].


(3)  extraneous (duplicated) text

Within Section 3.1 of RFC 4524, the first line on page 14,

   3.3.  documentSeriesExample:

should say:

      Example:


(4)  incomplete information

Within Appendix A of RFC 4524, I miss a note describing the fate
of the 'pilotOrganization' object class (RFC 1274, Section 8.3.13).

Kurt:
  For completeness, it would be nice if you could provide
  supplementary text (similar to, and perhaps to be inserted
  after, section A.3 of RFC 4524) detailing the intentions of
  the authors regarding that object class.

Notes:

RFC 451x and RFC 452x have been published in June 2006.

from pending


Report New Errata