FYI - this report has been deleted as junk. Thank you.
RFC Editor/rv > On Jun 8, 2024, at 6:36 AM, Paul Wouters <[email protected]> wrote: > > delete, not reject, is the proper action for spam. > > Paul > > Sent using a virtual keyboard on a phone > >> On Jun 7, 2024, at 23:51, Olafur Gudmundsson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Like Victor says Reject as this is a spam errata filing >> >>> On Jun 7, 2024, at 10:45 PM, Viktor Dukhovni <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> 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] _______________________________________________ dane mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
