Looks like this one can safely be accepted. spt
> On Oct 03, 2016, at 13:47, RFC Errata System <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org> > wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6066, > "Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions: Extension Definitions". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6066&eid=4817 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Editorial > Reported by: ResponderIDs type is not defined anywhere. > <vincentle...@gmail.com> > > Section: 8 > > Original Text > ------------- > In the OCSPStatusRequest, the "ResponderIDs" provides a list of OCSP > responders that the client trusts. > > Corrected Text > -------------- > In the OCSPStatusRequest, the "ResponderID" provides a list of OCSP > responders that the client trusts. > > or clearer > > In OCSPStatusRequest, the "responder_id_list" provides a list of > "ResponderID", OCSP responders that the client trusts. > > Notes > ----- > ResponderIDs is not defined anywhere within the document. > > Quote of this section in RFC6961 section 2.2 (p.4) seem to have fixed this. > > 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 (IESG) > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC6066 (draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-12) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions: Extension > Definitions > Publication Date : January 2011 > Author(s) : D. Eastlake 3rd > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Transport Layer Security > Area : Security > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
