Re: [Cbor] [Ext] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-cbor-7049bis-14: (with COMMENT)

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Wed, 30 September 2020 13:26 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FC2A3A095F; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 06:26:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w6zRCFFa18RO; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 06:26:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 507CD3A08EB; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 06:26:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C1cTl1R3JzyZg; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:26:19 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <159960212460.14731.6166470610948655056@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:26:18 +0200
Cc: "cbor@ietf.org" <cbor@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 623165178.802075-df8dc720b95da96d698773f9187e1c53
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D59FE3AD-1CBC-4020-857F-7217CAE427DD@tzi.org>
References: <159960212460.14731.6166470610948655056@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/qJYV7k51anF_rEYBPsKEtuOOKVU>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] [Ext] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-cbor-7049bis-14: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: cbor@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Concise Binary Object Representation \(CBOR\)" <cbor.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cbor>, <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cbor/>
List-Post: <mailto:cbor@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cbor>, <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:26:25 -0000

>> ** Section 1.0. Is it possible to enumerate the fixed errata?
> 
> It is possible, but does not seem important. They were issues in some examples.

Rereading this comment, it now appears to me that it is asking for what is Appendix G.1:

https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-cbor-7049bis-15.html#name-errata-processing-clerical-

(I don’t think there is a need to reference that from Section 1 — anyone searching for “errata” will find Appendix G.1.)

Grüße, Carsten