Hi Zahed, We are unable to verify this erratum that the submitter marked as editorial. Please note that we have changed the “Type” of the following errata report to “Technical”. As Stream Approver, please review and set the Status and Type accordingly (see the definitions at https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata-definitions/).
Note: We updated the line breaks in the report to improve readability. We suggest that you review the report at the link below rather than review the email. You may review the report at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7702 Please see https://www.rfc-editor.org/how-to-verify/ for further information on how to verify errata reports. Further information on errata can be found at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.php. Thank you. RFC Editor/rv > On Nov 14, 2023, at 7:23 PM, RFC Errata System <[email protected]> > wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9114, > "HTTP/3". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7702 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Editorial > Reported by: Lucas Pardue <[email protected]> > > Section: 10.7 > > Original Text > ------------- > Where > HTTP/2 > employs > PADDING > frames > and > Padding > fields > in > other > frames > to > make > a > connection > more > resistant > to > traffic > analysis, > HTTP/3 > can > either > rely > on > transport-layer > padding > or > employ > the > reserved > frame > and > stream > types > discussed > in > Sections > 7.2.8 > and > 6.2.3. > > Corrected Text > -------------- > Where > HTTP/2 > employs > Padding > fields > in > some > frames > to > make > a > connection > more > resistant > to > traffic > analysis, > HTTP/3 > can > either > rely > on > transport-layer > padding > or > employ > the > reserved > frame > and > stream > types > discussed > in > Sections > 7.2.8 > and > 6.2.3. > > Notes > ----- > HTTP/2 doesn't define PADDING frames > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is spam, it > will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party > will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC9114 (draft-ietf-quic-http-34) > -------------------------------------- > Title : HTTP/3 > Publication Date : June 2022 > Author(s) : M. Bishop, Ed. > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : QUIC > Area : Transport > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG >
