On 29 Feb 2020, at 9:17, Robert Raszuk wrote:
Maybe just errata containing spelling errors could be approved by an AD alone, but to fundamentally change the meaning of the specification IMHO it would be pretty bad for IETF process to allow such shortcut.
You might want to have a peek at https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/processing-rfc-errata/
Errors that the AD determines "could cause implementation or deployment problems or significant confusion" are marked as Verified, but "changes that modify the working of a protocol to something that might be different from the intended consensus when the document was approved should be either Hold for Document Update or Rejected." It is up to the AD to determine whether the text aligns with the intention of the WG that produced the document. There is no further processing of errata beyond this.
pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best
