Re: [ftpext] RFC Errata for consideration

[Anthony Bryan <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 3:43 PM, William F. Maton <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>        If this WG gains traction, would RFC errata (such as the ones I came
> across for RFC 3659) also be dealt with as part of a charter?

while on the subject of errata, I've come across a few in RFC 959 that
I'll be posting for verification & discussion with the group. most are
editorial though.

here's one:

RFC 959

      type

         The data representation type used for data transfer and
         storage.  Type implies certain transformations between the time
         of data storage and data transfer.  The representation types
         defined in FTP are described in the Section on Establishing
         Data Connections.

Errata
The representation types defined in FTP are described in Section 3.1,
Data Representation and Storage, or more specifically 3.1.1, Data
Types. They don't seem to be described in 3.2, Establishing Data
Connections.


also, RFC 1123 contains a number of updates to RFC 959 (& others).
(presumably, "Updates: XXXX" wasn't in use in 1989?) should this be
reported as errata to RFC 1123?

-- 
(( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [ http://www.metalinker.org ]
  )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads