Please let me know whether this errata should be validated, rejected, or
'hold for document update'

TY,
Deb
your new Sec AD

On Mon, Oct 6, 2025 at 4:53 PM Madison Church <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Liam,
>
> We have updated the errata report to use the correct version of the
> Corrected Text (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=8593
> ).
>
> Thank you!
>
> Madison Church
> RFC Production Center
>
> > On Oct 4, 2025, at 10:14 AM, Liam Waddicor <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > My apologies, I see I pasted the incorrect corrected text from my
> editor, the last line is changed slightly in this one, the correct version
> is:
> >
> > Corrected Text
> > --------------
> > If the REQUIRETLS option or TLS-Required message header field is used
> > when sending a message, it indicates the sender's preference for
> > transport-level encryption: REQUIRETLS mandates that the message be
> > relayed over a TLS-protected session, whereas the TLS-Required header
> > field allows the sender to request that recipient-side policy
> > mechanisms, such as MTA-STS and DNS-based Authentication of Named
> > Entities (DANE), be temporarily ignored – for example, so as to overcome
> > configuration errors when delivery takes precedence and the
> > security of the message is unimportant.
> >
> > On Sat, 4 Oct 2025 at 16:51, RFC Errata System <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8689,
> > "SMTP Require TLS Option".
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > You may review the report below and at:
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8593
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > Type: Technical
> > Reported by: Liam W <[email protected]>
> >
> > Section: Abstract
> >
> > Original Text
> > -------------
> > If the REQUIRETLS option or TLS-Required message header field is used
> > when sending a message, it asserts a request on the part of the message
> > sender to override the default negotiation of TLS, either by requiring
> > that TLS be negotiated when the message is relayed or by requesting
> > that recipient-side policy mechanisms such as MTA-STS and DNS-Based
> > Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) be ignored when relaying a
> > message for which security is unimportant.
> >
> > Corrected Text
> > --------------
> > If the REQUIRETLS option or TLS-Required message header field is used
> > when sending a message, it indicates the sender's preference for
> > transport-level encryption: REQUIRETLS mandates that the message be
> > relayed over a TLS-protected session, whereas the TLS-Required header
> > field allows the sender to request that recipient-side policy
> > mechanisms, such as MTA-STS and DNS-based Authentication of Named
> > Entities (DANE), be temporarily ignored—for example, so as to overcome
> > configuration errors when delivery takes precedence or when the
> > security of the message is unimportant.
> >
> > Notes
> > -----
> > This wording is slightly misleading as the 'TLS-Required: No' header
> field is intended to ignore recipient-side policies, prioritizing delivery.
> However, it is not meant for messages "for which security is unimportant",
> but rather for cases like misconfigured recipient servers. The wording
> could be misinterpreted as allowing insecure delivery for convenience.
> >
> > The corrected text clarifies the distinction between REQUIRETLS and
> TLS-Required.Emphasizes that TLS-Required is for exceptional cases (not
> general insecurity).
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > RFC8689 (draft-ietf-uta-smtp-require-tls-09)
> > --------------------------------------
> > Title               : SMTP Require TLS Option
> > Publication Date    : November 2019
> > Author(s)           : J. Fenton
> > Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> > Source              : Using TLS in Applications
> > Stream              : IETF
> > Verifying Party     : IESG
>
>
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to