RFC Errata
Found 3 records.
Status: Verified (3)
RFC 3659, "Extensions to FTP", March 2007
Source of RFC: ftpext (app)
Errata ID: 899
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2007-04-14
Verifier Name: RFC Editor
Date Verified: 2007-11-02
Section 6.5 says:
That those pathnames all exist does not imply that the TVFS sever will necessarily grant any kind of access rights to the named paths, or that access to the same file via different pathnames will necessarily be granted equal rights.
It should say:
That those pathnames all exist does not imply that the TVFS server will necessarily grant any kind of access rights to the named paths, or that access to the same file via different pathnames will necessarily be granted equal rights.
Notes:
typo: sever --> server
from pending
Errata ID: 900
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2007-04-14
Verifier Name: RFC Editor
Date Verified: 2007-11-02
Section 7 says:
The MLST and MLSD commands also extend the FTP protocol as presented in STD 9, RFC 959 [3] and STD 3, RFC 1123 [9] to allow that transmission of 8-bit data over the control connection.
It should say:
The MLST and MLSD commands also extend the FTP protocol as presented in STD 9, RFC 959 [3] and STD 3, RFC 1123 [9] to allow the transmission of 8-bit data over the control connection.
Notes:
typo: that --> the
from pending
Errata ID: 6252
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Simon Kissane
Date Reported: 2020-08-08
Verifier Name: Orie Steele
Date Verified: 2024-03-29
Section 10.2 says:
To add a file type to this OS specific registry of OS specific file types, an applicant must send to the IANA a request, in which is specified the OS name, the OS specific file type, a definition of the syntax of the fact value, which must conform to the syntax of a token as given in this document, and a specification of the semantics to be associated with the particular fact and its values.
It should say:
To add a file type to this OS specific registry of OS specific file types, an applicant must send to the IANA a request, in which is specified the OS name, the OS specific file type, and a specification of the semantics to be associated with the particular OS specific file type.
Notes:
It appears that the text in section 10.2 has been copy/pasted from section 10.1, without applying the necessary adjustments for the differences between OS-specific facts and OS-specific filetypes. While OS-specific facts do have values (see section 7.2), there is no concept of a "value" of an OS-specific filetype defined in the RFC (see section 7.5.1.5).
This error effectively makes it impossible to register an OS-specific filetype with IANA, were IANA to follow the wording of the RFC to the letter – IANA must demand a "definition of the syntax of the fact value" for every filetype registration, despite the fact that request makes no sense for a filetype as defined in the RFC.