Re: Proposed IESG Statement Regarding RFC Errata for IETF Sream RFCs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I support adoption of these proposed guidelines, but have a couple of minor 
comments...


>    After an erratum is reported, a report will be sent to the authors and
>
>    Area Directors (ADs) of the WG in which it originated.  If the WG has
>    closed or the document was not associated with a WG, then the
>    report will be sent to the ADs for the Area most closely associated
>    to the subject matter.

If the document was produced by a WG that is not closed, the report should 
be copied to the WG chairs as well.

>    5.  Ugly typos that are clearly bogus typos but would not cause any
>        confusions to implementation or deployments should be Archived.

The intent here is reasonable, but IMHO it's kind of poorly expressed.
I'd suggest "Clear typographical errors which would not cause...".




-- Jeff
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]