Subject: [Geopriv] Errata report on erratum 2066 to RFC5774 ("Considerations for Civic Addresses in the PIDF-LO") and errata 2521 and 2522 to RFC 5986 ("Discovering the Local Location Information Server")

From: "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 14:01:33 -0500

======================================================================
RFC5774, "Considerations for Civic Addresses in the PIDF-LO:
Guidelines and IANA Registry Definition",
Source of RFC: geopriv (rai)

Errata ID: 2066

Status: Reported
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2010-03-05

Section 1, 6th para says:

   Section 3.4 of [RFC4776] also contains instructions on the creation
|  of civic address considerations documents on page 8.  This document
   updates that section and replaces said instructions with Sections 4
   and 5 of this memo.

It should say:

   Section 3.4 of [RFC4776] also contains instructions on the creation
|  of civic address considerations documents on page 9.  This document
   updates that section and replaces said instructions with Sections 4
   and 5 of this memo.

Notes:

Rationale:
This indeed refers to the second paragraph on page _9_ of RFC 4776.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommended status:  (correct) Hold for document update
======================================================================
RFC5986, "Discovering the Local Location Information Server (LIS)"
Source of RFC: geopriv (rai)

Errata ID: 2521

Status: Reported
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2010-09-15

Section 3.4,3rd para says:

   DHCPv4 option 15 [RFC2132] provides an indication of the domain name
|  that a host uses when resolving hostnames in DNS.  This option is
   used when the DHCPv4 access domain name is not available.

It should say:

   DHCPv4 option 15 [RFC2132] provides an indication of the domain name
|  that a host uses when resolving hostnames in the DNS.  This option is
   used when the DHCPv4 access domain name is not available.

Notes:

Rationale: missing article
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommended status:  (correct) Hold for document update

This erratum is difficult to assess absolutely; the terms "DNS" and
"the DNS" are both used with this meaning.  RFC 5986 uses "the DNS"
twice and "DNS" once, making it difficult to state which convention it
uses, and therefore, which uses are incorrect.  In any case, the
editor of the revised document can resolve it.
======================================================================
RFC5986, "Discovering the Local Location Information Server (LIS)"
Source of RFC: geopriv (rai)

Errata ID: 2522

Status: Reported
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2010-09-15

Section 5, pg.12 says:

|  The domain name that used to authenticate the LIS is the domain name
   input to the U-NAPTR process, not the output of that process
   [RFC3958], [RFC4848].  As a result, the results of DNS queries do not
   need integrity protection.

It should say:

|  The domain name that is used to authenticate the LIS is the domain
   name input to the U-NAPTR process, not the output of that process
   [RFC3958], [RFC4848].  As a result, the results of DNS queries do not
   need integrity protection.

Notes:

Rationale: missing verb: "is"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommended status:  (correct) Hold for document update

Either "is" should be inserted (to give "The domain name that is used
to ...")  or "that" should be removed (to give "The domain name used
to ...".  In any case, the editor of the revised document can resolve
it.
======================================================================

Dale