I just marked it verified.

S

On 08/08/16 15:07, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Aug 2016, RFC Errata System wrote:
> 
>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7929,
>> "DNS-Based Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) Bindings for OpenPGP".
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> You may review the report below and at:
>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7929&eid=4768
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> Type: Editorial
>> Reported by: James Manger <[email protected]>
>>
>> Section: 5.3.
>>
>> Original Text
>> -------------
>> For example, if the OPENPGPKEY RR query for [email protected]
>> (8d57[...]b7._openpgpkey.example.com) yields a CNAME to
>> 8d57[...]b7._openpgpkey.example.net, and an OPENPGPKEY RR for
>> 8d57[...]b7._openpgpkey.example.net exists,
>>
>> Corrected Text
>> --------------
>> For example, if the OPENPGPKEY RR query for [email protected]
>> (c93f[...]d6._openpgpkey.example.com) yields a CNAME to
>> c93f[...]d6._openpgpkey.example.net, and an OPENPGPKEY RR for
>> c93f[...]d6._openpgpkey.example.net exists,
>>
>> Notes
>> -----
>> The example hash 8d57[...]b7 is wrong. It has been calculated with the
>> wrong hash algorithm: SHA-224, instead of SHA-256. The correct hash is
>> c93f[...]d6, which is shown in the example in section 3.
>>
>> 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 (IESG)
>> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
> 
> The errata is correct :/
> 
> Paul
> 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane

Reply via email to