ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6376 (4926)

2017-02-07 12:27:39
Murray, Tony, or someone else: Can you independently check that these
examples need the extra space in order to be verified correctly?

Murray did that for us a decade ago -- it's one of the test cases that 
opendkim uses.

Yes, but the point is: did Murray (or anyone) extract the text *from
the published RFC* and use that as input?  That is apparently what
Simon did, which resulted in this report.

Assuming they do, this errata report should be marked "Verified", but
the type should be changed to "Editorial", not "Technical".

Hmmn.  It's really both, a technical error caused by an editorial change.

No: a Technical erratum is one where the spec actually says something
technically wrong, such that if you implemented according to the spec,
your implementation would be wrong.  Missing space characters in
examples == Editorial.

b
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html