RE: Proposed IESG Statement Regarding RFC Errata for IETF Sream RFCs

["David Harrington" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I read this document. On a quick read, this seemed very reasonable.

David Harrington
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] 
> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of The IESG
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 8:17 AM
> To: IETF Announcement list
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; 
> [e-mail]
> Subject: Proposed IESG Statement Regarding RFC Errata for 
> IETF Sream RFCs 
> 
> The IESG is considering the following statement to guide the 
> handling of
> RFC Errata for IETF Stream RFCs.  Your review and comment on 
> this policy
> is encouraged.
> 
> Russ Housley
> on Behalf of the IESG
> 
> 
> - - - - - - - - - - - -
> 
> 
> Proposed IESG Statement Regarding RFC Errata for IETF Sream RFCs
> 
>    These are strong guidelines and not immutable rules.  Common
sense
>    and good judgment should be used by the IESG to decide what is
the
>    right thing to do.  Errata are meant to fix "bugs" in the
>    specification and should not be used to change what the community
>    meant when it approved the RFC.  These guidelines only apply to
>    errata on RFCs in the IETF stream.  They apply to new errata and
>    not errata that had already been approved.
> 
>    After an erratum is reported, a report will be sent to the 
> authors and
> 
>    Area Directors (ADs) of the WG in which it originated.  If 
> the WG has
>    closed or the document was not associated with a WG, then the
>    report will be sent to the ADs for the Area most closely
associated
>    to the subject matter.  The ADs for the area will review it,
either
>    themselves or by delegating, and classify it as falling under
>    one of the following states:
> 
>    o  Approved - The errata is appropriate under the criteria 
> below and
>       should be available to implementors or people deploying the
RFC.
> 
>    o  Rejected - The errata is in error, or proposes a change 
> to the RFC
>       that is clearly inappropriate to do with an errata.  In 
> the latter
>       case, if the change is to be considered for future 
> updates of the
>       document, it should be proposed using other channels 
> than errata,
>       such as a WG mailing list.
> 
>    o  Archived - The errata is not a necessary update to the RFC.
>       However, any future update of the document should consider
this
>       errata, and determine whether it is correct and merits
including
>       in the update.
> 
>    Guidelines for review are:
> 
>    1.  Only errors that could cause implementation or deployment
>        problems or significant confusion should be Approved.
> 
>    2.  Things that are clearly wrong but could not cause an
>        implementation or deployment problem should be Archived.
> 
>    3.  Errata on obsolete RFCs should treated the same as errata on
>        non-obsolete RFC where there is strong evidence that some
>        people are still making use of the related technology.
> 
>    4.  Trivial grammar corrections should be Archived.
> 
>    5.  Ugly typos that are clearly bogus typos but would not cause
any
>        confusions to implementation or deployments should be
Archived.
> 
>    6.  Changes which are simply stylistic issues or simply make
things
>        read better should be Archived.
> 
>    7.  Changes that modified the working of a protocol to 
> something that
>        might be different from the intended consensus when 
> the document
>        was approved should be either Archived or Rejected. Deciding
>        between these two depends on judgment. Changes that are
clearly
>        modifications to the intended consensus, or are of major
>        importance, should be Rejected. In unclear situations, small
>        changes can be Archived.
> 
>    8.  Changes that modify the working of a process, such as
changing
>        an IANA registration procedure, to something that might be
>        different from the intended consensus when the document was
>        approved should be Archived.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
> 


_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce