RFC Errata


Errata Search
 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 3 records.

Status: Held for Document Update (2)

RFC 5031, "A Uniform Resource Name (URN) for Emergency and Other Well-Known Services", January 2008

Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 7163

Source of RFC: ecrit (rai)

Errata ID: 1261
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2008-01-13
Held for Document Update by: Robert Sparks

Section 7.2 (p.11) says: 

   [LOST]     Hardie, T., "LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation
|             Protocol", Work in Progress, March 2007.

It should say:

   [LOST]     Hardie, T., "LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation
|             Protocol", Work in Progress, August 2007.

Notes:

Outdated reference.

The publication of RFC 5012 and this RFC (5031) apparently has been
coordinated. Hence, both RFCs should refer to the same version of
this particular work in progress.

Errata ID: 1262
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2008-01-13
Held for Document Update by: Robert Sparks

Section App.A (p.13) says: 

   tel:sos  This solution avoids name conflicts, but requires extending
|     the "tel" URI "tel" [RFC3966].  It also only works if every
      outbound proxy knows how to route requests to a proxy that can
      reach emergency services since tel URIs do not identify the
      destination server.

It should say:

   tel:sos  This solution avoids name conflicts, but requires extending
|     the "tel" URI [RFC3966].  It also only works if every outbound
      proxy knows how to route requests to a proxy that can reach
      emergency services since tel URIs do not identify the destination
      server.

Notes:

Spurious word replication of "tel" .

For conformance with the display enhancement style used throughout the
document, it might also have been preferable to use single quotes:
'tel' .

Status: Rejected (1)

RFC 5031, "A Uniform Resource Name (URN) for Emergency and Other Well-Known Services", January 2008

Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 7163

Source of RFC: ecrit (rai)

Errata ID: 6359
Status: Rejected
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Dale R. Worley
Date Reported: 2020-12-19
Rejected by: Barry Leiba
Date Rejected: 2020-12-22

Section 4.2, 7.2 says: 

In section 4.2:

The 'sos' service type describes emergency services requiring an
immediate response, typically offered by various branches of the
government or other public institutions.

It should say:

In section 4.2, add a reference:

The 'sos' service type describes emergency services requiring an
immediate response, typically offered by various branches of the
government or other public institutions. [IRC]

In section 7.2, add a reference:

[IRC] Service Regulations annexed to the International Radiotelegraphic
Convention, Berlin, 1906, section 6. a., article XVI.
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.32044103239133&view=1up&seq=36

Notes:

The referenced section of the protocols of the convention is "Ships in distress make use of the following signal: . . . - - - . . . repeated at short intervals. ...".
--VERIFIER NOTES--
Thanks for suggesting the reference, and it's interesting to have a source that shows where the "sos" term started.

It's not an error, though: the RFC is correct as published, and there was never an intent to cite a reference there. So as an errata report, this is rejected... with encouragement for interested readers to look at the historic reference.

Report New Errata



Advanced Search