Errata

Status:

Verified

Type:

Technical

Reported By:

Chlisin

Date Reported:

2003-02-06

Section 3.3 says:

   The usual mail address <local-part>@<mail-domain> is mapped into a
   domain name by converting <local-part> into a single label
   (regardles of dots it contains), converting <mail-domain> into a
   domain name using the usual text format for domain names (dots
   denote label breaks), and concatenating the two to form a single
   domain name. 

It should say:

   The usual mail address <local-part>@<mail-domain> is mapped into a
   domain name by converting <local-part> into a single label
   (regardless of dots it contains), converting <mail-domain> into a
   domain name using the usual text format for domain names (dots
   denote label breaks), and concatenating the two to form a single
   domain name.

Status:

Verified

Type:

Technical

Reported By:

Robert Edmonds

Date Reported:

2016-07-11

Verified by:

Warren Kumari (Ops AD)

Date Verified:

2018-04-01

Section 4.3.2 says:

   6. Using local data only, attempt to add other RRs which may be
      useful to the additional section of the query.  Exit.

It should say:

   6. Using local data only, attempt to add other RRs which may be
      useful to the additional section of the response.  Exit.

Notes:

Changed "query" to "response".

Section 4.3.2 describes the algorithm used by nameservers to answer queries. I.e., a nameserver receives a query from a client, and then it performs this algorithm in order to construct a response to send to the client. 

Steps 1, 3, and 5 of this algorithm talk about setting fields or bits in the response, or about adding resource records to the answer section of the response, but then step 6 says to add resource records to the additional section of the *query*. This doesn't make any sense, because the server is constructing a response to a query that it's already received. "Response" must have been intended instead.

Status:

Verified

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

"Yin Shuming"

Date Reported:

2006-02-18

Section 4.3.1 says:

This bit specifies specifies whether the requester wants recursive service 
for this query. Clients may.....

It should say:

This bit specifies whether the requester wants recursive service for this 
query. Clients may.....

Status:

Verified

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

John Kristoff

Date Reported:

2006-03-13

Section 2.2. says:

  - Where there tradeoffs between the cost of acquiring data, the

but should probably say:

  - Where there are tradeoffs between the cost of acquiring data, the

Section 3.6.2. says:

  For example, suppose a name server was processing a query with for

but should probably simply say:

  For example, suppose a name server was processing a query for

Section 4.3.4. misspells 'because':

  This feature can be particularly important in a system which
  implements naming short shorts that use search lists beacuse

It should say:

[see above]

Notes:

from pending

Status:

Verified

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

Shane Kerr

Date Reported:

2017-02-20

Verified by:

Terry Manderson

Date Verified:

2017-03-01

Section 4.3.5. says:

it must assume that its copy of the zone is obsolete an discard it.

It should say:

it must assume that its copy of the zone is obsolete and discard it.

Notes:

Fix typo; "an" should be "and".

Status:

Verified

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

Ivan Panchenko

Date Reported:

2021-03-08

Verified by:

Barry Leiba

Date Verified:

2021-03-08

Section 5.3 says:

than typical occurances.  This section outlines a recommended basic

It should say:

than typical occurrences.  This section outlines a recommended basic

Notes:

Misspelled "occurrences".

Status:

Verified

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

Ivan Panchenko

Date Reported:

2021-03-08

Verified by:

Barry Leiba

Date Verified:

2021-03-08

Section 7 says:

                Networks",Communications of the ACM, October 1986,

It should say:

                Networks", Communications of the ACM, October 1986,

Notes:

Missing space.

Status:

Verified

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

Ivan Panchenko

Date Reported:

2021-03-08

Verified by:

Barry Leiba

Date Verified:

2021-03-08

Section 7 says:

                Superceeded by this memo.

It should say:

                Superseded by this memo.

Notes:

Misspelled "superseded".

Status:

Verified

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

Stephan Garland

Date Reported:

2022-09-01

Verified by:

RFC Editor

Date Verified:

2022-09-02

Throughout the document, when it says:

insure

It should say:

ensure

Notes:

Section 3.6.2 uses both ensure and insure to mean the same thing, which is to guarantee or make certain. Sections 4.1, 4.2.2, and 5.3.3 all use the insure form.

Generally, insure is used in the financial sense, with making certain being a secondary definition. At the very least, consistency in the same paragraph of 3.6.2 would be cleaner.

Status:

Verified

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

Ben Buehler

Date Reported:

2024-02-23

Verified by:

RFC Editor

Date Verified:

2024-02-25

Section 3.7.1 says:

The QCLASS field may contain:

<any class>     matches just that class (e.g., IN, CH).

*               matches aLL RR classes.

It should say:

The QCLASS field may contain:

<any class>     matches just that class (e.g., IN, CH).

*               matches all RR classes.

Notes:

Manual inspection of each use of the terms RR and RRs did not reveal any additional incorrectly capitalized adjacent words.

aLL > all

Status:

Held for Document Update

Type:

Technical

Reported By:

John Kristoff

Date Reported:

2006-03-13

Held for Document Update by:

Brian Haberman

Date Held for Document Update:

2012-04-26

Section 6.1. ends this way:

  Relative and absolute domain names may be freely intermixed in a
  master

which is incomplete.  It's unclear exactly how that sentence may have
been intended to end, but minimally I would suggeste it at least
terminated with 'file.'.

Section 6.2.8. in the diagram shows 'QTYPE=A', but should be of
type 'CNAME' based on the context of the example.

It should say:

[see above]

Notes:

from pending

Status:

Held for Document Update

Type:

Technical

Reported By:

Mukund Sivaraman

Date Reported:

2018-03-31

Held for Document Update by:

Warren Kumari (Ops AD)

Date Held for Document Update:

2018-04-09

Section 4.3.3 says:

A * label appearing in a query name has no special effect, but can be
used to test for wildcards in an authoritative zone; such a query is the
only way to get a response containing RRs with an owner name with * in
it.  The result of such a query should not be cached.

It should say:

A * label appearing in a query name has no special effect, but can be
used to test for wildcards in an authoritative zone; such a query is the
only way to get a response containing RRs with an owner name with * in
it.  The result of such a query should not be used to synthesize RRs.

Notes:

It is perfectly OK for an RR with a wildcard label '*' to be cached as long as it's not used to synthesize any RRs on a caching resolver. The DNS implementations BIND and Unbound both cache such RRsets with wildcard label in the owner name.

WK (OpsAD): Please see thread https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg22563.html for additional information.

Status:

Held for Document Update

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

Sun Congyou

Date Reported:

2015-01-11

Held for Document Update by:

Ted Lemon

Date Held for Document Update:

2015-01-14

Section 4.2.2 says:

[RFC-1033] catalogs available DNS software an discusses administration 
procedures.

It should say:

[RFC-1033] catalogs available DNS software and discusses administration 
procedures.

Status:

Held for Document Update

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

Sun Congyou

Date Reported:

2015-01-11

Held for Document Update by:

Ted Lemon

Date Held for Document Update:

2015-01-14

Section 4.3.3 says:

   - When the query name or a name between the wildcard domain and
     the query name is know to exist.

It should say:

   - When the query name or a name between the wildcard domain and
     the query name is known to exist.

Status:

Held for Document Update

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

Jean-Philippe Paradis

Date Reported:

2015-02-12

Held for Document Update by:

Ted Lemon

Date Held for Document Update:

2015-02-12

Section 2.3 says:

The organization of the domain system derives from some assumptions
about the needs and usage patterns of its user community and is designed
to avoid many of the the complicated problems found in general purpose
database systems.

It should say:

The organization of the domain system derives from some assumptions
about the needs and usage patterns of its user community and is designed
to avoid many of the complicated problems found in general purpose
database systems.

Notes:

Just a duplicate "the".

Status:

Held for Document Update

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

Jean-Philippe Paradis

Date Reported:

2015-02-12

Held for Document Update by:

Ted Lemon

Date Held for Document Update:

2015-02-12

Section 2.4 says:

In the interests of performance, implementations may couple these
functions.  For example, a resolver on the same machine as a name server
might share a database consisting of the the zones managed by the name
server and the cache managed by the resolver.

It should say:

In the interests of performance, implementations may couple these
functions.  For example, a resolver on the same machine as a name server
might share a database consisting of the zones managed by the name
server and the cache managed by the resolver.

Notes:

Just a duplicate "the".

Status:

Held for Document Update

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

Han Ge Xin

Date Reported:

2015-10-23

Held for Document Update by:

Terry Manderson

Date Held for Document Update:

2015-11-01

Section 3.6 says:

identifies a mail exchange for the domain. See [RFC-974 for details.

It should say:

identifies a mail exchange for the domain. See [RFC-974] for details.

Notes:

Just missing the "]"

Status:

Held for Document Update

Type:

Editorial

Reported By:

anonymous

Date Reported:

2016-12-22

Held for Document Update by:

Warren Kumari (Ops AD)

Date Held for Document Update:

2018-04-01

Section 3.7.1 says:

For example, a mailer tying to send mail to Mockapetris@ISI.EDU might
ask the resolver for mail information about ISI.EDU, resulting in a
query for QNAME=ISI.EDU, QTYPE=MX, QCLASS=IN.

It should say:

For example, a mailer trying to send mail to Mockapetris@ISI.EDU might
ask the resolver for mail information about ISI.EDU, resulting in a
query for QNAME=ISI.EDU, QTYPE=MX, QCLASS=IN.

Notes:

Trying, not tying.