While there is nothing wrong with the change it isn’t actually a errata as it is referring the reader back to section 6.1.3 where both forms where discussed together.
> On 8 Jun 2021, at 06:20, Warren Kumari <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I believe that this Errata should be marked as Verified; does anyone disagree? > > Please let me know by Friday if you disagree, > W > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: RFC Errata System <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 12:57 AM > Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC1035 (6601) > To: <[email protected]> > Cc: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> > > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC1035, > "Domain names - implementation and specification". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6601 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Patrick Ni <[email protected]> > > Section: 7.1 > > Original Text > ------------- > This timestamp uses the absolute time format previously discussed for RR > storage in zones and caches > > Corrected Text > -------------- > This timestamp uses the absolute time format previously discussed for RR > storage in caches > > Notes > ----- > In section 6.1.3. Time, it says "while data in the zone stays with constant > TTL ... The RRs in zones use relative times; the refresh timers and cache > data use absolute times" > > 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. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC1035 (no draft string recorded) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Domain names - implementation and specification > Publication Date : November 1987 > Author(s) : P.V. Mockapetris > Category : INTERNET STANDARD > Source : Legacy > Area : Legacy > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > > > > -- > The computing scientist’s main challenge is not to get confused by the > complexities of his own making. > -- E. W. Dijkstra > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [email protected] _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
