RFC Errata
Found 3 records.
Status: Reported (2)
RFC 4506, "XDR: External Data Representation Standard", May 2006
Source of RFC: nfsv4 (wit)
Errata ID: 6382
Status: Reported
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ed Schouten
Date Reported: 2021-01-08
Section 6.3 says:
declaration:
type-specifier identifier
| type-specifier identifier "[" value "]"
| type-specifier identifier "<" [ value ] ">"
| "opaque" identifier "[" value "]"
| "opaque" identifier "<" [ value ] ">"
| "string" identifier "<" [ value ] ">"
| type-specifier "*" identifier
| "void"
[...]
struct-body:
"{"
( declaration ";" )
( declaration ";" )*
"}"
[...]
type-def:
"typedef" declaration ";"
| "enum" identifier enum-body ";"
| "struct" identifier struct-body ";"
| "union" identifier union-body ";"
It should say:
None
Notes:
This grammar permits statements like:
typedef void;
struct foo { void; };
rpcgen doesn't allow this, failing with the following error message:
voids allowed only inside union and program definitions with one argument
Errata ID: 7101
Status: Reported
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Dylan Allbee
Date Reported: 2022-08-21
Section 4.3 says:
Enumerations have the same representation as signed integers.
Enumerations are handy for describing subsets of the integers.
Enumerated data is declared as follows:
enum { name-identifier = constant, ... } identifier;
For example, the three colors red, yellow, and blue could be
described by an enumerated type:
enum { RED = 2, YELLOW = 3, BLUE = 5 } colors;
It should say:
...
enum identifier { name-identifier = constant, ... } ;
^^^^^^^^^^
...
enum colors { RED = 2, YELLOW = 3, BLUE = 5 } ;
^^^^^^
Notes:
The grammar for this definition, as specified in 6.3, is:
type-def:
"typedef" declaration ";"
| "enum" identifier enum-body ";"
| "struct" identifier struct-body ";"
| "union" identifier union-body ";"
It is unclear whether the original intent was for identifies to precede or succeed the definition bodies. The example in section 7 shows: enum filekind { ... }
And several RFCs which depend on 4506 have also followed that pattern, such as this example from RFC 5531, section 8.2: enum auth_flavor { ... }
Status: Held for Document Update (1)
RFC 4506, "XDR: External Data Representation Standard", May 2006
Source of RFC: nfsv4 (wit)
Errata ID: 76
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2006-05-24
Held for Document Update by: Martin Stiemerling
(1) Section 6.2, page 18 - typo (word omission)
The words in the 9th line of the text,
[...] "followed by one or hexadecimal digits" [...]
should say:
[...] "followed by one or more hexadecimal digits" [...]
^^^^^^
(2) Section 8, 2nd paragraph (page 22) - typo
The RFC says:
Care must be take to properly encode and decode data to avoid
attacks. [...]
it should say:
vv
Care must be taken to properly encode and decode data to avoid
attacks. [...]
(3) Subtle inconsistency between Section 6.1 and Section 6.2
On page 17, Section 6.1 states the Notational Convention:
(2) Terminal symbols are strings of characters surrounded by
double quotes.
^^^^^^
Nevertheless, throughout the new Section 6.2 (on page 18), all
terminal symbols, e.g. the "generalized digits" -- the terminals
to build octal, decimal, and hexadecimal constants, are specified
as characters surrounded by *single* quotes.
^^^^^^
Although this style perhaps was inspired by the `C` language,
IMHO, its use is inconsistent in that context.
Notes:
from pending