On 12/21/12 1:33 AM, SM wrote:
I used RFC 5735 as an example. There is a message from the person who submitted the erratum at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/current/msg13689.html The threads of the discussion are at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/current/msg13645.html and http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/current/msg13681.html It's difficult for the average reader to understand what is the current "standard" when document status, "updates" and "obsoletes" requires convoluted tracking.
I am still confused. What is the action item here? Do you think something needs to be fixed in this document?
pr -- Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/> Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478