On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 02:08:19PM -0700, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6698,
> "The DNS-Based Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) Transport Layer
> Security (TLS) Protocol: TLSA".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7975
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: PJI <[email protected]>
>
> Section: GLOBAL
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> unlicense
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> unlicense
>
> Notes
> -----
> 2119
Neither "unlicense" (USA spelling), nor "unlicence" (much of of the rest
of the English speaking world) appear in the document, and the erratum,
as proposed, is a NOOP. The word "License" (US), appears only in the
RFC2119 boilerplate text. If the intent is to switch to non-USA
spelling (works for me, but good luck with that!), I don't believe that
doing that document by document as a "technical" erratum is a productive
path forward.
The erratum should be rejected.
--
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
dane mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
