On 10-May-21 07:11, Carsten Bormann wrote: > On 2021-05-09, at 20:54, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rec_status=2&area_acronym=tsv&errata_type=2&presentation=table > > Wow, thanks. Yes, thanks. So we can quickly see that there are 556 unhandled errata, and the oldest ones were reported in 2010. That seems to be about 8% of the total errata ever reported. Is this a problem worth fixing? On the entertainment side, there's one very plausible erratum on RFC1321 (MD5) reported last year, and one on RFC 1180, the "TCP/IP tutorial" from 1991, reported in 2017. And in case anybody's wondering, I did *not* report the erratum #5209 on RFC1001. But it might well be valid. Brian > > I immediately glanced at > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rec_status=2&area_acronym=art&errata_type=2&presentation=table > > 228 of them. Two even reported by me that I had completely forgotten about :*) > > So how do I find unhandled errata reports for all RFCs that I’m a co-author on? > > Grüße, Carsten > > :*) https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rec_status=2&errata_type=2&presentation=table&submitter_name=Carsten%20Bormann >
