errata logo graphic

Found 2 records.

Status: Verified (2)

RFC5657, "Guidance on Interoperation and Implementation Reports for Advancement to Draft Standard", September 2009

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

Errata ID: 1900

Status: Verified
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2009-10-02
Verifier Name: Russ Housley
Date Verified: 2010-04-12

Section 5.5 says:

|     [RFC4234] progressed from Proposed Standard through Draft Standard
|     to Standard and is obsoleted by [RFC5234].

It should say:

|     [RFC4234] progressed from Proposed Standard to Draft Standard and
|     then has been obsoleted by the Full Standard [RFC5234].

Notes:

Clear description of historical timeline.


Errata ID: 1901

Status: Verified
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2009-10-02
Verifier Name: Russ Housley
Date Verified: 2010-04-12

Section 6.2 says:

[[ second paragraph of Section 6.2 ]]

      VRFY and EXPN commands are often not implemented or are disabled.
      This does not pose an interoperability problem for SMTP because
|     EXPN is an optional features and its support is never relied on.
      [...]                     ^^


It should say:

      VRFY and EXPN commands are often not implemented or are disabled.
      This does not pose an interoperability problem for SMTP because
|     EXPN is an optional feature and its support is never relied on.
      [...]                     ^

Notes:

Correct typo.


Report New Errata