RFC Errata


Errata Search
 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 3 records.

Status: Held for Document Update (3)

RFC 2142, "Mailbox Names for Common Services, Roles and Functions", May 1997

Source of RFC: Legacy
Area Assignment: app

Errata ID: 1082
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Frank Ellermann
Date Reported: 2007-11-20
Held for Document Update by: Peter Saint-Andre
Date Held: 2010-09-15

Section 5 says: 

MAILBOX        SERVICE             SPECIFICATIONS
[...]
USENET         NNTP                [RFC977]
NEWS           NNTP                Synonym for USENET

It should say:

MAILBOX        SERVICE             SPECIFICATIONS
[...]
USENET         NNTP                [RFC1849]
NEWSMASTER     NNTP                Synonym for USENET

Notes:

RFC 977 (obsoleted by RFC 3977) as well as RFC 1036 (obsoleted by RFC.ietf-usefor-usefor) don't specify rôle accounts USENET or NEWS.

Section 1 states that "Other protocols have defacto standards for well known mailbox names, such as <USENET@domain> for NNTP (see [RFC977])", however the IETF USEFOR WG didn't add just as little as an informative reference to RFC 2142.

IESG NOTE (2010-09-15): The foregoing text is corrupted, however the intent is clearly that [son-of-1036] is the proper reference for the USENET mailbox convention; note that in March 2010 [son-of-1036] was published as RFC 1849. --Peter Saint-Andre

Errata ID: 1763
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Nick Levinson
Date Reported: 2009-04-15
Held for Document Update by: Alexey Melnikov
Date Held: 2010-09-02

Section 1 says: 

Most organizations do not need to support the full set of mailbox names defined
here, since not every organization will implement the all of the associated
                                                  ^^^
services.

It should say:

Most organizations do not need to support the full set of mailbox names defined
here, since not every organization will implement all of the associated services.

Errata ID: 1764
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Nick Levinson
Date Reported: 2009-04-15
Held for Document Update by: Peter Saint-Andre
Date Held: 2010-09-15

Section 1 & 2 says: 

top level domain

It should say:

organization's principal domain name

Notes:

1. The phrase "top level domain" seems to mean 'second-level and top level domains together', and perhaps 'third- to top level domains together' in cases like <example.co.uk>. It is erroneous now that _top level domain_ (_TLD_) is specifically only what comes after the last dot in a domain, and nonreserved TLDs are so registered at IANA.org.

2. I would rather someone else propose replacement phrasing.

3. This is submitted 2009-04-16.

EDITOR'S NOTE (2010-09-15): This matter was discussed on the app-discuss and dnsext mailing lists, and consensus emerged on the phrase "organization's principal domain name". --Peter Saint-Andre

Report New Errata



Advanced Search