Found 1 record.

No records found for status Verified.

No records found for status Reported.

Status: Held for Document Update (1)

RFC 5741, "RFC Streams, Headers, and Boilerplates", December 2009

Note: This RFC has been obsoleted by RFC 7841

Errata ID: 3331
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: RJ Atkinson
Date Reported: 2012-08-30
Held for Document Update by: IAB-Chair

Section 3.2.2 says:

In one place:

   "Suggested initial text, for current streams, is provided below."

In another place:

   "The text that follows is stream dependent -- these are suggested
   initial values and may be updated by stream definition document
   updates."

It should say:

In the first instance:
   "Initial mandatory text, for current streams, is provided below."

In the second instance:
   "The text that follows is stream dependent -- these are the initial
   mandatory text values.  These stream-dependent mandatory text values 
   MAY be updated by stream definition document updates.  This text 
   MUST NOT be revised or expanded on a document-by-document basis."

Notes:

Although parts of RFC-5741 use RFC-2119 language ("must", "should", "may") in a very clear way, Section 3.2.2 uses ambiguous phrasing ("suggested") and recently has been interpreted in different ways by different people (all of whom are experienced IETF/IRTF/RFC-Editor people).

Leslie Daigle sent a note to the relevant folks that clarified the intent of this sub-section of this RFC. Her note read, in part:
%
% The expectation, when writing RFC5741, was that the boilerplate was fixed.
% The "suggested text" connotations in the document were meant to indicate
% that the boilerplate might be updated in the stream definition itself,
% not on a document-by-document basis.

The primary confusing/problematic sentences from RFC-5741 are copied and pasted separately into "Original Text" in this errata submission. Candidate edited sentences, intended to be consistent with Leslie's clarification of the authors' intended meaning, are provided in "Corrected Text", but some other editorial correction might well be better/clearer.

The primary goal of this erratum is to help ensure that any future revisions of RFC-5741, and also any future revisions of the closely related stream-dependent publication documents, are more clear about the fixed nature of "Status of this Memo" text.

Report New Errata