RFC Errata


Errata Search

 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 2 records.

Status: Verified (1)

RFC 6891, "Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS(0))", April 2013

Source of RFC: dnsext (int)

Errata ID: 3604
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT

Reported By: Olafur Gudmundsson
Date Reported: 2013-04-24
Verifier Name: Ted Lemon
Date Verified: 2013-04-24

Section 9.1 says:

9.1.  OPT Option Code Allocation Procedure

  OPT Option Codes are assigned by Expert Review.

  Assignment of Option Codes should be liberal, but duplicate
  functionality is to be avoided.

It should say:

9.1.  DNS EDNS0 Option Code Changes

  This document modifies the name of the existing registry DNS EDNS0 
  Options to DNS EDNS0 Option Codes (OPT) and updates the registration
  procedures to Expert Review.

  Assignment of Option Codes should be liberal, but duplicate
  functionality is to be avoided.

Notes:

In the publication process fixing this one minor mistake in clarifying the name of the registry fell through the cracks, the consequence of this is that IANA needs this errata to clarify the registry name.

Status: Rejected (1)

RFC 6891, "Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS(0))", April 2013

Source of RFC: dnsext (int)

Errata ID: 6982
Status: Rejected
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT

Reported By: Avninder Sran
Date Reported: 2022-05-29
Rejected by: Eric Vyncke
Date Rejected: 2022-05-30

Section 4.3 says:

Traditional DNS messages are limited to 512 octets in size when sent over UDP [RFC1035]. Fitting the increasing amounts of data that can be transported in DNS in this 512-byte limit is becoming more difficult. For instance, inclusion of DNSSEC records frequently requires a much larger response than a 512-byte message can hold.

It should say:

Traditional DNS messages are limited to 512-bytes in size when sent over UDP [RFC1035]. Fitting the increasing amounts of data that can be transported in DNS in this 512-byte limit is becoming more difficult. For instance, inclusion of DNSSEC records frequently
 requires a much larger response than a 512-byte message can hold.

Notes:

In the original text, it says: DNS messages are limited to 512 octets in size, but it should be 512 bytes not octets.


--VERIFIER NOTES--
Most RFCs use "octets" and "bytes" as equivalent (even if I personally prefer "octets").

Report New Errata



Advanced Search