RFC Errata
Found 28 records.
Status: Verified (12)
RFC 1035, "Domain names - implementation and specification", November 1987
Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 1101, RFC 1183, RFC 1348, RFC 1876, RFC 1982, RFC 1995, RFC 1996, RFC 2065, RFC 2136, RFC 2181, RFC 2137, RFC 2308, RFC 2535, RFC 2673, RFC 2845, RFC 3425, RFC 3658, RFC 4033, RFC 4034, RFC 4035, RFC 4343, RFC 5936, RFC 5966, RFC 6604, RFC 7766, RFC 8482, RFC 8490, RFC 8767
Source of RFC: LegacyArea Assignment: int
Errata ID: 562
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: CFeng
Date Reported: 2003-02-09
Section 6.4.2 says:
+-----------------------------------------+
Header | OPCODE=RESPONSE, ID=997 |
+-----------------------------------------+
Question |QTYPE=A, QCLASS=IN, QNAME=VENERA.ISI.EDU |
+-----------------------------------------+
Answer | VENERA.ISI.EDU A IN 10.1.0.52 |
+-----------------------------------------+
Authority | <empty> |
+-----------------------------------------+
Additional | <empty> |
+-----------------------------------------+
It should say:
+-----------------------------------------+
Header | OPCODE=IQUERY, ID=997, QR=1 |
+-----------------------------------------+
Question |QTYPE=A, QCLASS=IN, QNAME=VENERA.ISI.EDU |
+-----------------------------------------+
Answer | VENERA.ISI.EDU A IN 10.1.0.52 |
+-----------------------------------------+
Authority | <empty> |
+-----------------------------------------+
Additional | <empty> |
+-----------------------------------------+
Notes:
There is an error in the Header line. It should be
"OPCODE=IQUERY, ID=997, QR=1" because the OPCODE does not have a
value of RESPONSE (see Section 4.1.1).
Errata ID: 2130
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alexei A. Smekalkine
Date Reported: 2010-04-05
Verifier Name: Brian Haberman
Date Verified: 2012-04-26
Section 3.2.1 says:
TTL a 32 bit signed integer that specifies the time interval
that the resource record may be cached before the source
of the information should again be consulted. Zero
values are interpreted to mean that the RR can only be
used for the transaction in progress, and should not be
cached. For example, SOA records are always distributed
with a zero TTL to prohibit caching. Zero values can
also be used for extremely volatile data.
It should say:
TTL a 32 bit unsigned integer that specifies the time interval
that the resource record may be cached before the source
of the information should again be consulted. Zero
values are interpreted to mean that the RR can only be
used for the transaction in progress, and should not be
cached. For example, SOA records are always distributed
with a zero TTL to prohibit caching. Zero values can
also be used for extremely volatile data.
Notes:
Conflicting descriptions of the type of TTL field.
Section 3.2.1 says "a 32 bit signed integer" while section 4.1.3 says "a 32 bit unsigned integer".
Errata ID: 6601
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Patrick Ni
Date Reported: 2021-06-07
Verifier Name: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Verified: 2021-06-14
Section 7.1 says:
This timestamp uses the absolute time format previously discussed for RR storage in zones and caches
It should say:
This timestamp uses the absolute time format previously discussed for RR storage in caches
Notes:
In section 6.1.3. Time, it says "while data in the zone stays with constant TTL ... The RRs in zones use relative times; the refresh timers and cache data use absolute times"
Errata ID: 563
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Allan Edward Prentice
Date Reported: 2006-03-04
Verifier Name: Brian Haberman
Date Verified: 2012-04-26
Section 5.1 says:
Because these files are text files several special encodings are
necessary to allow arbitrary data to be loaded. In particular:
of the root.
@ A free standing @ is used to denote the current origin.
It should say:
Because these files are text files several special encodings are necessary to allow arbitrary data to be loaded. In particular: @ A free standing @ is used to denote the current origin.
Notes:
"of the root." makes no sense here.
Errata ID: 5728
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Etan Wexler
Date Reported: 2019-05-21
Verifier Name: RFC Editor
Date Verified: 2019-06-03
Section 3.3.5 says:
See the definition of MX and [RFC-974] for details ofw the new scheme.
It should say:
See the definition of MX and [RFC-974] for details of the new scheme.
Notes:
ofw -> of
Errata ID: 6264
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Merlin Büge
Date Reported: 2020-08-24
Verifier Name: Eric Vyncke
Date Verified: 2023-08-03
Section 2.2 says:
amount of new network code which is required. This scheme can also allow a group of hosts can share a small number of caches rather than maintaining a large number of separate caches, on the premise that the centralized caches will have a higher hit ratio. In either case,
It should say:
amount of new network code which is required. This scheme can also allow a group of hosts to share a small number of caches rather than maintaining a large number of separate caches, on the premise that the centralized caches will have a higher hit ratio. In either case,
Notes:
[WK]: s/a group of hosts can share a/a group of hosts to share a/ (I had to use 'dif' to find the change. Commenting here to save others from same.
[EV] Indeed the s/can/to/ is a valid grammar correction.
Errata ID: 6463
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ivan Panchenko
Date Reported: 2021-03-08
Verifier Name: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Verified: 2021-03-08
Section 3.3.13 says:
reason for this provison is to allow future dynamic update facilities to
It should say:
reason for this provision is to allow future dynamic update facilities to
Notes:
Mistyped "provision".
Errata ID: 6464
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ivan Panchenko
Date Reported: 2021-03-08
Verifier Name: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Verified: 2021-03-08
Section 4.1.4 says:
Pointers can only be used for occurances of a domain name where the
It should say:
Pointers can only be used for occurrences of a domain name where the
Notes:
Misspelled "occurrences".
Errata ID: 6465
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ivan Panchenko
Date Reported: 2021-03-08
Verifier Name: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Verified: 2021-03-08
Section 8.2 says:
This condition means the the mailbox was actually a mailing
It should say:
This condition means that the mailbox was actually a mailing
Notes:
Doubling.
Errata ID: 6466
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Ivan Panchenko
Date Reported: 2021-03-08
Verifier Name: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Verified: 2021-03-08
Section 9 says:
Superceeded by this memo.
It should say:
Superseded by this memo.
Notes:
Misspelled "superseded".
Errata ID: 7424
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Wolfgang Keller
Date Reported: 2023-04-15
Verifier Name: RFC Editor
Date Verified: 2023-04-26
Section 2.3.1. says:
The following syntax will result in fewer problems with many applications that use domain names (e.g., mail, TELNET).
It should say:
The following syntax will result in fewer problems with many applications that use domain names (e.g., mail, TELNET).
Notes:
In section "2.3.1. Preferred name syntax" of RFC 1035, there occures a double newline in the middle of a sentence. This double newline should be replaced by a single newline.
Errata ID: 7587
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Roj
Date Reported: 2023-08-02
Verifier Name: RFC Editor
Date Verified: 2023-08-02
Section 4.1.1 says:
ID A 16 bit identifier assigned by the program that
generates any kind of query. This identifier is copied
the corresponding reply and can be used by the requester
to match up replies to outstanding queries.
It should say:
ID A 16 bit identifier assigned by the program that
generates any kind of query. This identifier is copied
to the corresponding reply and can be used by the
requester to match up replies to outstanding queries.
Notes:
There’s a missing preposition.
Status: Held for Document Update (15)
RFC 1035, "Domain names - implementation and specification", November 1987
Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 1101, RFC 1183, RFC 1348, RFC 1876, RFC 1982, RFC 1995, RFC 1996, RFC 2065, RFC 2136, RFC 2181, RFC 2137, RFC 2308, RFC 2535, RFC 2673, RFC 2845, RFC 3425, RFC 3658, RFC 4033, RFC 4034, RFC 4035, RFC 4343, RFC 5936, RFC 5966, RFC 6604, RFC 7766, RFC 8482, RFC 8490, RFC 8767
Source of RFC: LegacyArea Assignment: int
Errata ID: 1813
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: moritzh
Date Reported: 2009-07-19
Held for Document Update by: Brian Haberman
Section 5.3 says:
The following is an example file which might be used to define the
ISI.EDU zone.and is loaded with an origin of ISI.EDU:
@ IN SOA VENERA Action\.domains (
20 ; SERIAL
7200 ; REFRESH
600 ; RETRY
3600000; EXPIRE
60) ; MINIMUM
NS A.ISI.EDU.
NS VENERA
NS VAXA
MX 10 VENERA
MX 20 VAXA
A A 26.3.0.103
VENERA A 10.1.0.52
A 128.9.0.32
VAXA A 10.2.0.27
A 128.9.0.33
[...]
Note the use of the \ character in the SOA RR to specify the responsible
person mailbox "Action.domains@E.ISI.EDU".
It should say:
The following is an example file which might be used to define the
ISI.EDU zone.and is loaded with an origin of ISI.EDU:
@ IN SOA VENERA Action\.domains (
20 ; SERIAL
7200 ; REFRESH
600 ; RETRY
3600000; EXPIRE
60) ; MINIMUM
NS A.ISI.EDU.
NS VENERA
NS VAXA
MX 10 VENERA
MX 20 VAXA
A A 26.3.0.103
VENERA A 10.1.0.52
A 128.9.0.32
VAXA A 10.2.0.27
A 128.9.0.33
[...]
Note the use of the \ character in the SOA RR to specify the responsible
person mailbox "Action.domains@ISI.EDU".
Notes:
The introductory sentence and the following zone definition both correctly refer to the zone ISI.EDU. But the closing sentence noting the usage of "\." in the mailbox name erroneously expands the example to "Action.domains@E.ISI.EDU" instead of "Action.domains@ISI.EDU".
Errata ID: 3421
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Jeremy C. Reed
Date Reported: 2012-11-28
Held for Document Update by: Brian Haberman
Section 3.3.5 says:
The recommended policy for dealing with MD RRs found in a master file is to reject them, or to convert them to MX RRs with a preference of 10.
It should say:
The recommended policy for dealing with MF RRs found in a master file is to reject them, or to convert them to MX RRs with a preference of 10.
Notes:
3.3.5 about MF says "dealing with MD". It should probably say "dealing with MF". I assume this is a copy and paste error from earlier section about MD.
Errata ID: 5626
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Petr Špaček
Date Reported: 2019-02-07
Held for Document Update by: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Held: 2019-02-08
Section 5.2. says:
Several other validity checks that should be performed in addition to
insuring that the file is syntactically correct:
1. All RRs in the file should have the same class.
2. Exactly one SOA RR should be present at the top of the zone.
3. If delegations are present and glue information is required,
it should be present.
4. Information present outside of the authoritative nodes in the
zone should be glue information, rather than the result of an
origin or similar error.
It should say:
Several other validity checks that should be performed in addition to
insuring that the file is syntactically correct:
1. All RRs in the file should have the same class.
2. Exactly one SOA RR should be present at the top of the zone.
3. If delegations are present and glue information is required,
it should be present.
4. Information present outside of the authoritative nodes in the
zone should be glue information, rather than the result of an
origin or similar error.
5. At least one NS RR must be present at the top of the zone.
Notes:
[ WK (OpsAD): This is correct, and should be considered / included if this RFC is updated. ]
RFC 1034 Section 4.2.1 vaguely specifies that NS RRs are expected to be found at zone apex but it is missing in the original algorithm above. This erratum adds explicit requirement for NS RR at zone apex.
Even more importantly this expectation was built into subsequent RFCs, e.g. RFC 2181 which would break if NS was present only in the parent zone but not in the child zone.
References to dnsop mailing list:
- https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/ipwko314FenUxrdzMl5vcick9wQ
- https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/JAS6TREsOh-b2J4rEAND6cds0Og
Errata ID: 2646
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Nikolai Malykh
Date Reported: 2010-11-29
Held for Document Update by: Brian Haberman
Section 5.3 says:
The following is an example file which might be used to define the ISI.EDU zone.and is loaded with an origin of ISI.EDU:
It should say:
The following is an example file which might be used to define the ISI.EDU zone and is loaded with an origin of ISI.EDU:
Errata ID: 2691
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Hirochika Asai
Date Reported: 2011-01-22
Held for Document Update by: Brian Haberman
Section 4.1.4 says:
In this scheme, an entire domain name or a list of labels at the end of a domain name is replaced with a pointer to a prior occurance of the same name.
It should say:
In this scheme, an entire domain name or a list of labels at the end of a domain name is replaced with a pointer to a prior occurrence of the same name.
Errata ID: 3230
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Sam Bretheim
Date Reported: 2012-05-22
Held for Document Update by: Brian Haberman
Section 4.1.1 says:
RA Recursion Available - this be is set or cleared in a
It should say:
RA Recursion Available - this bit is set or cleared in a
Errata ID: 3691
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Sam Bretheim
Date Reported: 2013-08-01
Held for Document Update by: Ted Lemon
Section 5.1 says:
\DDD where each D is a digit is the octet corresponding to
It should say:
\DDD where each D is a digit in the octet corresponding to
Errata ID: 4227
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Sun Congyou
Date Reported: 2015-01-09
Held for Document Update by: Ted Lemon
Date Held: 2015-01-10
Section 4.2.1 says:
Messages sent using UDP user server port 53 (decimal).
It should say:
Messages sent using UDP use server port 53 (decimal).
Notes:
I'm very sorry for my previous mistake in errata ID 4226, this should be a correct one.
Errata ID: 5463
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Shulhan
Date Reported: 2018-08-14
Held for Document Update by: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Held: 2018-08-14
Section 4.1.3 says:
RDATA a variable length string of octets that describes the
resource. The format of this information varies
according to the TYPE and CLASS of the resource record.
For example, the if the TYPE is A and the CLASS is IN,
the RDATA field is a 4 octet ARPA Internet address.
It should say:
RDATA a variable length string of octets that describes the
resource. The format of this information varies
according to the TYPE and CLASS of the resource record.
For example, if the TYPE is A and the CLASS is IN,
the RDATA field is a 4 octet ARPA Internet address.
Notes:
The original text says "For example, the if the ...", where it should say, "For example, if the ...".
Errata ID: 5915
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alexander Dupuy
Date Reported: 2019-11-21
Held for Document Update by: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Held: 2021-01-26
Section 6.2 says:
When a response is so long that truncation is required, the truncation should start at the end of the response and work forward in the datagram. Thus if there is any data for the authority section, the answer section is guaranteed to be unique.
It should say:
When a response is so long that truncation is required, the truncation should start at the end of the response and work forward in the datagram. Thus if there is any data for the authority section, the answer section is guaranteed to be complete.
Notes:
It's not clear what it might mean for an answer section to be unique. However, by following the algorithm described of removing RRs from the back to the front, if any RRs remain in the authority (or additional) section, the answer section is guaranteed to be complete.
[ See thread at: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/L_yjf4eyDRlkIOqaWULf1HUK8f0/ ]
Errata ID: 5974
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Xu Mingjie
Date Reported: 2020-02-03
Held for Document Update by: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Held: 2020-02-05
Section 3.4.2 says:
3.4.2. WKS RDATA format
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ADDRESS |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| PROTOCOL | |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ |
| |
/ <BIT MAP> /
/ /
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
where:
ADDRESS An 32 bit Internet address
PROTOCOL An 8 bit IP protocol number
<BIT MAP> A variable length bit map. The bit map must be a
multiple of 8 bits long
It should say:
3.4.2. WKS RDATA format
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ADDRESS |
| |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| PROTOCOL | |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ |
| |
/ <BIT MAP> /
/ /
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
where:
ADDRESS An 32 bit Internet address
PROTOCOL An 8 bit IP protocol number
<BIT MAP> A variable length bit map. The bit map must be a
multiple of 8 bits long
Notes:
There is an error in the ADDRESS field of WKS RDATA format. ADDRESS field should occupy two lines because it is 32 bit.
Errata ID: 5975
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Xu Mingjie
Date Reported: 2020-02-03
Held for Document Update by: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Held: 2020-02-05
Section 3.4.1 says:
3.4.1. A RDATA format
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ADDRESS |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
where:
ADDRESS A 32 bit Internet address.
It should say:
3.4.1. A RDATA format
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ADDRESS |
| |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
where:
ADDRESS A 32 bit Internet address.
Notes:
There is an error in the ADDRESS field of A RDATA format. ADDRESS field should occupy two lines because it is 32 bit.
Errata ID: 6260
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Merlin Büge
Date Reported: 2020-08-23
Held for Document Update by: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Held: 2020-08-24
Section 4.1.1 says:
ID A 16 bit identifier assigned by the program that
generates any kind of query. This identifier is copied
the corresponding reply and can be used by the requester
to match up replies to outstanding queries.
It should say:
ID A 16 bit identifier assigned by the program that
generates any kind of query. This identifier is copied
to the corresponding reply and can be used by the
requester to match up replies to outstanding queries.
Notes:
Alternative phrasing coule be "into the corresponding reply".
Errata ID: 6261
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Merlin Büge
Date Reported: 2020-08-23
Held for Document Update by: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Held: 2020-08-24
Section 4.1.1 says:
1 1 1 1 1 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ID |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
|QR| Opcode |AA|TC|RD|RA| Z | RCODE |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| QDCOUNT |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ANCOUNT |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| NSCOUNT |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ARCOUNT |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
It should say:
1 1 1 1 1 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ID |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
|QR| OPCODE |AA|TC|RD|RA| Z | RCODE |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| QDCOUNT |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ANCOUNT |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| NSCOUNT |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ARCOUNT |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
Notes:
"OPCODE" is written in all-caps throughout this document.
Errata ID: 6262
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Merlin Büge
Date Reported: 2020-08-23
Held for Document Update by: Warren Kumari (Ops AD)
Date Held: 2020-08-24
Section 4.1.1 says:
OPCODE A four bit field that specifies kind of query in this
message. This value is set by the originator of a query
and copied into the response. The values are:
It should say:
OPCODE A four bit field that specifies the kind of query in
this message. This value is set by the originator of a
query and copied into the response. The values are:
Notes:
[WK]: Added 'the' in 'specifies kind of query'...
Status: Rejected (1)
RFC 1035, "Domain names - implementation and specification", November 1987
Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 1101, RFC 1183, RFC 1348, RFC 1876, RFC 1982, RFC 1995, RFC 1996, RFC 2065, RFC 2136, RFC 2181, RFC 2137, RFC 2308, RFC 2535, RFC 2673, RFC 2845, RFC 3425, RFC 3658, RFC 4033, RFC 4034, RFC 4035, RFC 4343, RFC 5936, RFC 5966, RFC 6604, RFC 7766, RFC 8482, RFC 8490, RFC 8767
Source of RFC: LegacyArea Assignment: int
Errata ID: 4226
Status: Rejected
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Sun Congyou
Date Reported: 2015-01-09
Rejected by: Ted Lemon
Date Rejected: 2015-01-10
Section 4.2.1 says:
Messages sent using UDP user server port 53 (decimal).
It should say:
Messages sent using UDP uses server port 53 (decimal).
Notes:
--VERIFIER NOTES--
Duplicate of errata #4227.