Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9530 (8158)

Dear all,

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 11:29, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
wrote:

> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9530,
> "Digest Fields".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://w <https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8158>I think the

ww.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8158 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8158>
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Hugo Gonzalez Labrador <hugo.gonzalez.labrador@cern.ch>
>


Thanks Hugo for spotting this editorial issue.



> Section: B.2
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> Figure 14: Response with Both Content-Digest
>  and Digest (Empty Content)
>
>
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> Figure 14: Response with Both Content-Digest
> and Repr-Digest (Empty Content)
>
>
>
> Notes
> -----
> Minor Editorial correction
>

I do not think that this is a proper errata,
since this does not affect the normative part of the specifications.

@Lucas Pardue <lucas@lucaspardue.com> WDYT?

When we update this document
we will correct the figure caption.

Thanks again,
R.



>
> 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.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC9530 (draft-ietf-httpbis-digest-headers-13)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Digest Fields
> Publication Date    : February 2024
> Author(s)           : R. Polli, L. Pardue
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : HTTP
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG


>