RFC Errata
Found 8 records.
Status: Verified (2)
RFC 1459, "Internet Relay Chat Protocol", May 1993
Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 2810, RFC 2811, RFC 2812, RFC 2813, RFC 7194
Source of RFC: LegacyArea Assignment: app
Errata ID: 4091
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Peter Kovacs
Date Reported: 2014-08-23
Verifier Name: Barry Leiba
Date Verified: 2014-09-17
Section 2.3 says:
The presence of a prefix is indicated with a single leading ASCII
colon character (':', 0x3b), which must be the first character of the
message itself.
It should say:
The presence of a prefix is indicated with a single leading ASCII
colon character (':', 0x3a), which must be the first character of the
message itself.
Notes:
The ASCII colon character is represented by 0x3A, not 0x3B (which is the semicolon).
Errata ID: 4318
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Lucas Satabin
Date Reported: 2015-03-31
Verifier Name: Barry Leiba
Date Verified: 2015-04-02
Section 1.3 says:
There are two types of channels allowed by this protocol. One is a distributed channel which is known to all the servers that are connected to the network. These channels are marked by the first character being a only clients on the server where it exists may join it. These are distinguished by a leading '&' character.
It should say:
There are two types of channels allowed by this protocol. One is a distributed channel, which is known to all the servers that are connected to the network. These channels are marked by the first character being a '#'. The other type of channel is limited to one server, and only clients on the server where it exists may join it. These channels are distinguished by a leading '&' character.
Notes:
There is a missing chunk of text between "being a" and "only clients".
Status: Held for Document Update (5)
RFC 1459, "Internet Relay Chat Protocol", May 1993
Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 2810, RFC 2811, RFC 2812, RFC 2813, RFC 7194
Source of RFC: LegacyArea Assignment: app
Errata ID: 3355
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Stephen Chavez
Date Reported: 2012-09-15
Held for Document Update by: Barry Leiba
Section 4.4.1 says:
The <receiver> parameter may also me a host mask (#mask) or server mask ($mask).
It should say:
The <receiver> parameter may also be a host mask (#mask) or server mask ($mask).
Errata ID: 3414
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Kezhu Wang
Date Reported: 2012-11-25
Held for Document Update by: Barry Leiba
Section 4.1.3 says:
The USER message is used at the beginning of connection to specify the username, hostname, servername and realname of s new user.
It should say:
The USER message is used at the beginning of connection to specify the username, hostname, servername and realname of a new user.
Errata ID: 3938
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Myunggyun Jonathan Aldo Seo
Date Reported: 2014-03-28
Held for Document Update by: Barry Leiba
Date Held: 2014-05-07
Section 4.2.3.1 says:
When using the 'o' and 'b' options, a restriction on a total of three per mode command has been imposed. That is, any combination of 'o' and
It should say:
When using the 'o' and 'b' options, a restriction on a total of three per mode command has been imposed.
Notes:
The sentence lacks the last part and does not explain what it expected to. The change removes the incomplete, useless sentence.
Errata ID: 4854
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Chase Smith
Date Reported: 2016-11-04
Held for Document Update by: Barry Leiba
Date Held: 2019-04-30
Section 6.2 says:
To reply to a NAMES message, a reply pair consisting of RPL_NAMREPLY and RPL_ENDOFNAMES is sent by the server back to the client. If there is no channel found as in the query, then only RPL_ENDOFNAMES is returned. The exception to this is when a NAMES message is sent with no parameters and all visible channels and contents are sent back in a series of RPL_NAMEREPLY messages with a RPL_ENDOFNAMES to mark the end.
It should say:
To reply to a NAMES message, a reply pair consisting of RPL_NAMREPLY and RPL_ENDOFNAMES is sent by the server back to the client. If there is no channel found as in the query, then only RPL_ENDOFNAMES is returned. The exception to this is when a NAMES message is sent with no parameters and all visible channels and contents are sent back in a series of RPL_NAMREPLY messages with a RPL_ENDOFNAMES to mark the end.
Notes:
RPL_NAMEREPLY does not exist anywhere else in the document, while RPL_NAMREPLY is used 4 times. This is likely a typo.
----- Verifier Notes -----
One of them is clearly a typo, but a little research shows that implementations differ as to which one they use. Best that this be revisited in the unlikely event that the spec is ever revised.
Errata ID: 5291
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Matías Fachal
Date Reported: 2018-03-20
Held for Document Update by: Barry Leiba
Date Held: 2019-04-30
Section 2.2 says:
Because of IRC's scandanavian origin, the characters {}| are
considered to be the lower case equivalents of the characters []\,
respectively.
It should say:
Because of IRC's scandinavian origin, the characters {}| are
considered to be the lower case equivalents of the characters []\,
respectively.
Notes:
The demonym for those of the Scandinavian region is "Scandinavian", not "Scandanavian", as far as I know.
Status: Rejected (1)
RFC 1459, "Internet Relay Chat Protocol", May 1993
Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 2810, RFC 2811, RFC 2812, RFC 2813, RFC 7194
Source of RFC: LegacyArea Assignment: app
Errata ID: 7029
Status: Rejected
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: wizzwizz4
Date Reported: 2022-07-19
Rejected by: Orie Steele
Date Rejected: 2024-05-03
Section 4.2.3.2 says:
:MODE WiZ -w ; turns reception of WALLOPS messages
off for WiZ.
It should say:
MODE WiZ -w ; turns reception of WALLOPS messages
off for WiZ.
Notes:
:MODE WiZ -w is a WiZ message from MODE, but WiZ is not an IRC command.
--VERIFIER NOTES--
Was corrected in subsequent revisions: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2812#section-3.1.5