RFC 6710, "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol Extension for Message Transfer Priorities", August 2012Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUP
Errata ID: 3336
Status: Held for Document Update
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: D. Stussy
Date Reported: 2012-09-06
Held for Document Update by: Barry Leiba
Date Held: 2012-09-06
Section 7 says:
; New "clause" that can be used in the Received header field Pri = CFWS "PRIORITY" FWS priority-value ; Complies with the <Additional-Registered-Clauses> ; non-terminal syntax from RFC 5321.
It should say:
; New "clause" that can be used in the Received header field Pri = CFWS "priority" FWS priority-value ; Complies with the <Additional-Registered-Clauses> ; non-terminal syntax from RFC 5321.
All the subclauses of the "Received:" header in RFC 5321 are lowercase ("from", "by", "via", "with", "id", and "for" - in that order). I suggest that "PRIORITY" also be lower cased ("priority") for consistency.
Additional note: As this is the first additional clause, it obviously trails the others defined in RFC 5321 per the ABNF syntax found there. However, all future additional clauses should indicate their placement relative to additional clauses added to the list before them (i.e. RFC 5321 does not specify an order for the additional clauses, but each individual future RFC that proposes them should).
Minor editorial issues that won't cause confusion go into "Hold for Document Update." So let it be written; so let it be done.