Subject: [spfbis] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7208 (4841)

From: RFC Errata System <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 03:14:45 -0700 (PDT)

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7208,
"Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7208&eid=4841

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Alessandro Vesely <[email-masked]>

Section: 3.5.

Original Text
-------------
      EXAMPLE.COM.          MX      10      A.EXAMPLE.COM
      *.EXAMPLE.COM.        MX      10      A.EXAMPLE.COM
      A.EXAMPLE.COM.        MX      10      A.EXAMPLE.COM
      *.A.EXAMPLE.COM.      MX      10      A.EXAMPLE.COM

Corrected Text
--------------
      EXAMPLE.COM.          MX      10      A.EXAMPLE.COM.
      *.EXAMPLE.COM.        MX      10      A.EXAMPLE.COM.
      A.EXAMPLE.COM.        MX      10      A.EXAMPLE.COM.
      *.A.EXAMPLE.COM.      MX      10      A.EXAMPLE.COM.

Notes
-----
This is an editorial errata, since it is a punctuation error.

It is not technical, because the example might have implied an $ORIGIN of "." or some other strange setting, while a normative reference --rfc 1035-- makes it very clear that "[d]omain names that end in a dot are called absolute, and are taken as complete."  Hence no technical meaning is affected.

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC7208 (draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-21)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1
Publication Date    : April 2014
Author(s)           : S. Kitterman
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : SPF Update
Area                : Applications
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

---

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2016 22:56:00 -0700

Hello,
At 03:14 25-10-2016, RFC Errata System wrote:
>It is not technical, because the example might have implied an 
>$ORIGIN of "." or some other strange setting, while a normative 
>reference --rfc 1035-- makes it very clear that "[d]omain names that 
>end in a dot are called absolute, and are taken as complete."  Hence 
>no technical meaning is affected.

There is a dot at the end of the names in the L.H.S.  It should be 
similar for the R.H.S.  I suggest marking this erratum as "verified".

Regards,
S. Moonesamy