RFC Errata
Found 2 records.
Status: Held for Document Update (1)
RFC 5731, "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Domain Name Mapping", August 2009
Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUPArea Assignment: art
Errata ID: 4780
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Romuald Brunet
Date Reported: 2016-08-18
Held for Document Update by: Orie Steele
Date Held: 2024-04-01
Section 3.2.5 says:
- A <domain:registrant> element that contains the identifier for the human or organizational social information (contact) object to be associated with the domain object as the object registrant. This object identifier MUST be known to the server before the contact object can be associated with the domain object. An empty element can be used to remove registrant information. - A <domain:authInfo> element that contains authorization information associated with the domain object. This mapping includes a password-based authentication mechanism, but the schema allows new mechanisms to be defined in new schemas. A <domain: null> element can be used within the <domain:authInfo> element to remove authorization information.
It should say:
- An OPTIONAL <domain:registrant> element that contains the identifier for the human or organizational social information (contact) object to be associated with the domain object as the object registrant. This object identifier MUST be known to the server before the contact object can be associated with the domain object. An empty element can be used to remove registrant information. - An OPTIONAL <domain:authInfo> element that contains authorization information associated with the domain object. This mapping includes a password-based authentication mechanism, but the schema allows new mechanisms to be defined in new schemas. A <domain: null> element can be used within the <domain:authInfo> element to remove authorization information.
Notes:
The registrant and authinfo parameters are both optional according to the XML Schema specification.
But the text of the 3.2.5 is currently ambiguous (IMHO), and may lead to think both parameters are mandatory.
Status: Rejected (1)
RFC 5731, "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Domain Name Mapping", August 2009
Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUPArea Assignment: art
Errata ID: 4200
Status: Rejected
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Stéphane Bortzmeyer
Date Reported: 2014-12-15
Rejected by: Barry Leiba
Date Rejected: 2014-12-17
Section 3.2.3 says:
C: <domain:curExpDate>2000-04-03</domain:curExpDate>
It should say:
C: <domain:curExpDate>2000-04-03Z</domain:curExpDate>
Notes:
The Z for UTC seems mandatory, per section 2.4 (in XML schema, it is optional http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-2-20041028/#date ). Since <renew> is the only command with date (and not date-times), one may think dates are not forced to have a trailing Z but it is not mentioned in the RFC.
Detected by Kim-Minh Kaplan at AFNIC.
--VERIFIER NOTES--
The RFC could be clearer, but it is consistent that the "Z" is required in date-time but not on date only.