RFC Errata
RFC 3659, "Extensions to FTP", March 2007
Source of RFC: ftpext (app)See Also: RFC 3659 w/ inline errata
Errata ID: 6252
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Simon Kissane
Date Reported: 2020-08-08
Verifier Name: Orie Steele
Date Verified: 2024-03-29
Section 10.2 says:
To add a file type to this OS specific registry of OS specific file types, an applicant must send to the IANA a request, in which is specified the OS name, the OS specific file type, a definition of the syntax of the fact value, which must conform to the syntax of a token as given in this document, and a specification of the semantics to be associated with the particular fact and its values.
It should say:
To add a file type to this OS specific registry of OS specific file types, an applicant must send to the IANA a request, in which is specified the OS name, the OS specific file type, and a specification of the semantics to be associated with the particular OS specific file type.
Notes:
It appears that the text in section 10.2 has been copy/pasted from section 10.1, without applying the necessary adjustments for the differences between OS-specific facts and OS-specific filetypes. While OS-specific facts do have values (see section 7.2), there is no concept of a "value" of an OS-specific filetype defined in the RFC (see section 7.5.1.5).
This error effectively makes it impossible to register an OS-specific filetype with IANA, were IANA to follow the wording of the RFC to the letter – IANA must demand a "definition of the syntax of the fact value" for every filetype registration, despite the fact that request makes no sense for a filetype as defined in the RFC.