RFC Errata
Found 5 records.
Status: Verified (4)
RFC 4524, "COSINE LDAP/X.500 Schema", June 2006
Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUPArea Assignment: app
Errata ID: 7202
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ivan Panchenko
Date Reported: 2022-10-30
Verifier Name: RFC Editor
Date Verified: 2022-10-31
Section 1 says:
CCITT (Commite' Consultatif International de Telegraphique et
It should say:
CCITT (Comite Consultatif International de Telegraphique et
Notes:
Misspelling "Commite".
Errata ID: 7203
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ivan Panchenko
Date Reported: 2022-10-30
Verifier Name: Orie Steele
Date Verified: 2024-03-29
Section 3.4 says:
internationaliSDNNumber $ facsimileTelephoneNumber $ street $
postOfficeBox $ postalCode $ postalAddress $
physicalDeliveryOfficeName $ st $ l $ description $ o $
associatedName ) )
The 'top' object class and the 'dc', 'userPassword', 'searchGuide',
'seeAlso', 'businessCategory', 'x121Address', 'registeredAddress',
'destinationIndicator', 'preferredDeliveryMethod', 'telexNumber',
'teletexTerminalIdentifier', 'telephoneNumber',
'internationaliSDNNumber', 'facsimileTelephoneNumber', 'street',
It should say:
internationalISDNNumber $ facsimileTelephoneNumber $ street $
postOfficeBox $ postalCode $ postalAddress $
physicalDeliveryOfficeName $ st $ l $ description $ o $
associatedName ) )
The 'top' object class and the 'dc', 'userPassword', 'searchGuide',
'seeAlso', 'businessCategory', 'x121Address', 'registeredAddress',
'destinationIndicator', 'preferredDeliveryMethod', 'telexNumber',
'teletexTerminalIdentifier', 'telephoneNumber',
'internationalISDNNumber', 'facsimileTelephoneNumber', 'street',
Notes:
RFC 4519 has the spelling "internationalISDNNumber" instead of "internationaliSDNNumber".
Errata ID: 7204
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ivan Panchenko
Date Reported: 2022-10-30
Verifier Name: Orie Steele
Date Verified: 2024-04-01
Section 3.7 says:
facsimileTelephoneNumber $ internationaliSDNNumber $
physicalDeliveryOfficeName $ postalAddress $ postalCode $
postOfficeBox $ preferredDeliveryMethod $ registeredAddress $
seeAlso $ sn $ street $ telephoneNumber $
teletexTerminalIdentifier $ telexNumber $ x121Address ) )
The 'domain' object class is described in Section 3.4 of this
document. The 'cn', 'description', 'destinationIndicator',
'facsimileTelephoneNumber', 'internationaliSDNNumber,
It should say:
facsimileTelephoneNumber $ internationalISDNNumber $
physicalDeliveryOfficeName $ postalAddress $ postalCode $
postOfficeBox $ preferredDeliveryMethod $ registeredAddress $
seeAlso $ sn $ street $ telephoneNumber $
teletexTerminalIdentifier $ telexNumber $ x121Address ) )
The 'domain' object class is described in Section 3.4 of this
document. The 'cn', 'description', 'destinationIndicator',
'facsimileTelephoneNumber', 'internationalISDNNumber,
Notes:
RFC 4519 has the spelling "internationalISDNNumber" instead of "internationaliSDNNumber".
Errata ID: 7205
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ivan Panchenko
Date Reported: 2022-10-30
Verifier Name: RFC Editor
Date Verified: 2022-10-31
Section 3.9 says:
class does not require (or allow) the 'userPassword attribute'.
It should say:
class does not require (or allow) the 'userPassword' attribute.
Notes:
Unlucky positioning of quotation marks.
Status: Held for Document Update (1)
RFC 4524, "COSINE LDAP/X.500 Schema", June 2006
Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUPArea Assignment: app
Errata ID: 68
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2006-07-07
Held for Document Update by: Peter Saint-Andre
(1) referential inconsistency
The second paragraph of Section 1, on page 3 of RFC 4524, says:
In the years that followed, X.500 Directory Services have evolved to
incorporate new capabilities and even new protocols. In particular,
the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) [RFC4510] was
introduced in the early 1990s [RFC1487], with Version 3 of LDAP
introduced in the late 1990s [RFC2251] and subsequently revised in
| 2005 [RFC4510].
It should say:
In the years that followed, X.500 Directory Services have evolved to
incorporate new capabilities and even new protocols. In particular,
the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) [RFC4510] was
introduced in the early 1990s [RFC1487], with Version 3 of LDAP
introduced in the late 1990s [RFC2251] and subsequently revised in
| 2006 [RFC4510].
^
(Rationale: RFC 451x and RFC 452x have been published in June 2006.)
(2) typos
(2a) The third paragraph of Section 1, on page 3 of RFC 4524, says:
| While much of the material in RFC 1274 has been superceded by
subsequently published ITU-T Recommendations and IETF RFCs, [...]
It should say:
v
| While much of the material in RFC 1274 has been superseded by
subsequently published ITU-T Recommendations and IETF RFCs, [...]
(2b) The third paragraph of Section 1.1, on page 3, says:
The description of the 'domain' object class provided in this
| document supercedes that found in RFC 2247. That is, Section 3.4 of
this document replaces Section 5.2 of [RFC2247].
It should say:
The description of the 'domain' object class provided in this
| document supersedes that found in RFC 2247. That is, Section 3.4 of
this document replaces Section 5.2 of [RFC2247].
(3) extraneous (duplicated) text
Within Section 3.1 of RFC 4524, the first line on page 14,
3.3. documentSeriesExample:
should say:
Example:
(4) incomplete information
Within Appendix A of RFC 4524, I miss a note describing the fate
of the 'pilotOrganization' object class (RFC 1274, Section 8.3.13).
Kurt:
For completeness, it would be nice if you could provide
supplementary text (similar to, and perhaps to be inserted
after, section A.3 of RFC 4524) detailing the intentions of
the authors regarding that object class.
Notes:
RFC 451x and RFC 452x have been published in June 2006.
from pending