This seems to be the mail thread which discusses 7566/6118 : https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/d5KQEP1Ud1TxQpanNMY2_b0CpL8/
On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 12:13 PM Dave Crocker <dcroc...@bbiw.net> wrote: > On 8/2/2022 8:04 AM, RFC Errata System wrote: > > Type: Editorial > Reported by: Bernie Hoeneisen <ber...@ietf.hoeneisen.ch> > <ber...@ietf.hoeneisen.ch> > > Section: 4.1.2. > > Original Text > ------------- > | URI | _acct | [RFC6118] | > > Corrected Text > -------------- > | URI | _acct | [RFC7566] | > > Notes > ----- > Wrong reference. Note that is also has an impact to the IANA registry: > https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters/dns-parameters.xhtml#underscored-globally-scoped-dns-node-names > > > Folks, > > 1. Bernie, thanks for bringing this up > 2. Using this case as an example, the history in the attrleaf > development seems concerning. The RFC cited for this entry changes, over > the course of a number of I-D versions. So, in -13 is was RFC 7553, -14 is > was RFC 7566, and in -15 it went to RFC 6118. > 3. That the published version landed on the wrong choice should raise > a question possibly about process but especially about understanding. > > In Spring, 2018 and again in Fall, 2018, there was some focused discussion > (see: dnsop) about _acct, and related strings, and which citation to use > for the enum-related values. The choice bounced around, as I've cited. > This includes having what is now being deemed the 'correct' choice in -14... > > Note that none of the cited documents refers to the exact string "_acct". > So there is a derivation process that seems to be unclear. I believe the > attrleaf RFC contains no pedagogy about this, but it probably should. > > Before doing the simple -- but possibly wrong -- thing of agreeing on a > new -- or, rather, returning to an old -- better RFC citation, I suggest > there be some community discussion about the why of the right choice and > consideration of how to document that, this time, this latest choice is the > truly correct one. > > > d/ > > -- > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorkingbbiw.net > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
