IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cellar] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8794 (7192)

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 02 November 2022 07:24 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A7BBC152569 for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 00:24:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6pmqNWOBa2c2 for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 00:24:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [IPv6:2a01:7e00:e000:2bb::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BED7C1524DA for <cellar@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 00:24:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dyas.sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2a02:3032:40b:c231:bb05:36ba:d3b5:c722]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6708C1F45D for <cellar@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 07:24:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dyas.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4BA7BA0C45; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:24:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: from dyas (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dyas.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4981FA0C3A for <cellar@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:24:05 +0100 (CET)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: cellar@ietf.org
In-reply-to: <F222BBFC-A81E-4F79-AECF-E69B47379FFC@amsl.com>
References: <20221030080307.5A18FF650@rfcpa.amsl.com> <F222BBFC-A81E-4F79-AECF-E69B47379FFC@amsl.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Chris Smiley <csmiley@amsl.com> message dated "Tue, 01 Nov 2022 13:40:00 -0700."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:24:05 +0100
Message-ID: <658167.1667373845@dyas>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cellar/sbTeWDbeGnpxRcc4O-YGYLFQTi0>
Subject: Re: [Cellar] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8794 (7192)
X-BeenThere: cellar@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec Encoding for LossLess Archiving and Realtime transmission <cellar.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cellar/>
List-Post: <mailto:cellar@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2022 07:24:13 -0000

Chris Smiley <csmiley@amsl.com> wrote:
    > We are unable to verify this erratum that the submitter marked as editorial.
    > Please note that we have changed the “Type” of the following errata
    > report to “Technical”.

    >> 2001-01-01T00:00:00.000000000 UTC).  This provides a possible
    >> expression of time from 1708-09-11T00:12:44.854775808 UTC to
    >> 2293-04-11T11:47:16.854775807 UTC.


    >> Corrected Text
    >> --------------
    >> The Date Element stores an integer in the same format as the Signed
    >> Integer Element that expresses a point in time referenced in
    >> nanoseconds from the precise beginning of the third millennium of the
    >> Gregorian Calendar in Coordinated Universal Time (also known as
    >> 2001-01-01T00:00:00.000000000 UTC).  This provides a possible
    >> expression of time from September 1708 to April 2293.

The corrected text has less precision, which is why it seems to be a
technical edit.

I don't think that it matters much in the end, but maybe some explanation of
why we have dropped the time of day from the limits would be valuable?


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email