This is indeed an error in the published text and I agree with the proposed correction.
Many thanks for the report. > On 20 May 2025, at 18:05, RFC Errata System <[email protected]> wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9619, > "In the DNS, QDCOUNT Is (Usually) One". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8426 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Yixin Sun <[email protected]> > > Section: 1 > > Original Text > ------------- > clarify the allowable values of the QDCODE parameter > > Corrected Text > -------------- > clarify the allowable values of the QDCOUNT parameter > > Notes > ----- > The name of the parameter should be QDCOUNT. > > 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. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC9619 (draft-ietf-dnsop-qdcount-is-one-04) > -------------------------------------- > Title : In the DNS, QDCOUNT Is (Usually) One > Publication Date : July 2024 > Author(s) : R. Bellis, J. Abley > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Domain Name System Operations > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
