Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6265 (8877)

From a cursory check, this seems valid and not fixed in draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis. Could someone with greater depth in Cookies and/or ABNF please confirm?
________________________________
From: Andy Newton <andy@hxr.us>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2026 4:02 PM
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>; abarth@eecs.berkeley.edu <abarth@eecs.berkeley.edu>; eckelcu@cisco.com <eckelcu@cisco.com>; Jeff.Hodges@kingsmountain.com <Jeff.Hodges@kingsmountain.com>
Cc: lrnregister@gmail.com <lrnregister@gmail.com>; http-state@ietf.org <http-state@ietf.org>; Mike Bishop <mbishop@evequefou.be>
Subject: Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6265 (8877)

Hi RPC,

Please assign this to the WIT ADS (Mike is cc'ed).

-andy, ART AD

On 4/13/26 11:31 AM, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6265,
> "HTTP State Management Mechanism".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8877
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Lasse Nielsen <lrnregister@gmail.com>
>
> Section: 5.1.1
>
> Original Text
> -------------
>        3.  If the found-month flag is not set and the date-token matches
>            the month production, set the found-month flag and set the
>            month-value to the month denoted by the date-token.  Skip the
>            remaining sub-steps and continue to the next date-token.
>
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>        3.  If the found-month flag is not set and the date-token case-
>            insensitively matches the month production, set the found-month
>            flag and set the month-value to the month denoted by the date-token.
>            Skip the remaining sub-steps and continue to the next date-token.
>
>
> Notes
> -----
> The grammar for the `month` production only contains lower case month names, like `"jan"`. Nothing (that I have been able to find) says that the input text is converted to lower case, nor that mathcing or grammar terminals are case insensitive.
>
> The examples in section 3.1 includes this date: "Expires=Sun, 06 Nov 1994 08:49:37 GMT", which suggests that being case insensitive was intended.
>
> (I'm not sure the "case-insensitively matches" defined in section 2.3 can be applied to a grammar production, and not just a pair of strings. If it cannot be used in this way, then a different approach is needed.)
>
> 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.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC6265 (draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-23)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : HTTP State Management Mechanism
> Publication Date    : April 2011
> Author(s)           : A. Barth
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : HTTP State Management Mechanism
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG