If this is a Technical Erratum, as it claims, then it is time to get out
the abacus!

Tom Petch


----- Original Message -----
From: "RFC Errata System" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 11:12 AM
Subject: [Syslog] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5424 (5010)


> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5424,
> "The Syslog Protocol".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5010
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Job Snijders <[email protected]>
>
> Section: 8.1
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> This document guards against the technical issues outlined in UTR36 by
> REQUIRING "shortest form" encoding for syslog applications.
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> "Shortest Form" encoding is REQUIRED for syslog applications to guard
> against the technical issues outlined in UTR36.
>
> Notes
> -----
> "REQUIRING" is not a RFC 2119 keyword.
>
> 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.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC5424 (draft-ietf-syslog-protocol-23)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : The Syslog Protocol
> Publication Date    : March 2009
> Author(s)           : R. Gerhards
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Security Issues in Network Event Logging
> Area                : Security
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>
> _______________________________________________
> Syslog mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog

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

Reply via email to