Re: [Ecrit] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5031 (6359)
Randall Gellens <rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org> Tue, 22 December 2020 00:03 UTC
Return-Path: <rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org>
X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB3B73A1368 for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:03:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=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 6sHPtlTojNXN for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:03:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from turing.pensive.org (turing.pensive.org [99.111.97.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC84C3A1366 for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:03:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [169.254.250.14] (99.111.97.161) by turing.pensive.org with ESMTP (EIMS X 3.3.9); Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:04:18 -0800
From: Randall Gellens <rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Cc: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, allison.mankin@gmail.com, hgs+ecrit@cs.columbia.edu, worley@ariadne.com, ecrit@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:03:39 -0800
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673)
Message-ID: <510260B0-59F4-443C-BD41-2B20C54122E7@randy.pensive.org>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJLEZcD2KouGoJecHMRpW7wnfoQCdkeUoZ0oRo47EqYXAg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20201219194859.7F89DF4074D@rfc-editor.org> <CALaySJLEZcD2KouGoJecHMRpW7wnfoQCdkeUoZ0oRo47EqYXAg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_E13C79FC-86E5-443E-A431-3AFEEABA684B_="
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Embedded-HTML: [{"HTML":[538, 3986], "plain":[207, 3035], "uuid":"D04DCDF1-1164-4755-8105-CA4307574486"}]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ecrit/jkq_kWJhPfmJwfuTnJT2egHQeeE>
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5031 (6359)
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ecrit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ecrit/>
List-Post: <mailto:ecrit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:03:43 -0000
Can you reject with a note saying "Thanks, the reference is entertaining and appreciated, but doesn't add to a reader's understanding of the RFC"? --Randall On 19 Dec 2020, at 12:43, Barry Leiba wrote: > Hi, Dale, and thanks for taking the time to file this. > > I’m quite sure this isn’t really “errata”, though, in that > there was never > an intent to include a reference that explains the background of why > it’s > called “sos”. And while the reference might be good for > amusement, it > doesn’t relate to this usage... the RFC itself explains everything > necessary, and the only thing the reference adds is a pointer to why > it’s > called “sos”. > > So unless the working group (which is CCed here) thinks it’s worth > making > this “Held For Document Update”, I’m inclined to mark it > “Rejected”. > Anyone ecrit working group denizens care to comment? > > Barry > > On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 2:49 PM RFC Errata System > <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> > wrote: > >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5031, >> "A Uniform Resource Name (URN) for Emergency and Other Well-Known >> Services". >> >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6359 >> >> -------------------------------------- >> Type: Editorial >> Reported by: Dale R. Worley <worley@ariadne.com> >> >> Section: 4.2, 7.2 >> >> Original Text >> ------------- >> In section 4.2: >> >> The 'sos' service type describes emergency services requiring an >> immediate response, typically offered by various branches of the >> government or other public institutions. >> >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> In section 4.2, add a reference: >> >> The 'sos' service type describes emergency services requiring an >> immediate response, typically offered by various branches of the >> government or other public institutions. [IRC] >> >> In section 7.2, add a reference: >> >> [IRC] Service Regulations annexed to the International >> Radiotelegraphic >> Convention, Berlin, 1906, section 6. a., article XVI. >> https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.32044103239133&view=1up&seq=36 >> >> >> Notes >> ----- >> The referenced section of the protocols of the convention is "Ships >> in >> distress make use of the following signal: . . . - - - . . . >> repeated at >> short intervals. ...". >> >> Instructions: >> ------------- >> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please >> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party >> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC5031 (draft-ietf-ecrit-service-urn-07) >> -------------------------------------- >> Title : A Uniform Resource Name (URN) for Emergency and >> Other Well-Known Services >> Publication Date : January 2008 >> Author(s) : H. Schulzrinne >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >> Source : Emergency Context Resolution with Internet >> Technologies RAI >> Area : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure >> Stream : IETF >> Verifying Party : IESG >> > _______________________________________________ > Ecrit mailing list > Ecrit@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
- [Ecrit] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5031 (6359) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Ecrit] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5031 (… Barry Leiba
- Re: [Ecrit] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5031 (… Brian Rosen
- Re: [Ecrit] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5031 (… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [Ecrit] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5031 (… Randall Gellens
- Re: [Ecrit] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5031 (… worley
- Re: [Ecrit] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5031 (… Barry Leiba
- Re: [Ecrit] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5031 (… worley