Re: Old Errata

Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Mon, 12 September 2016 09:56 UTC

Subject: Re: Old Errata
To: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <8536B7D1-FBE7-403F-B635-7B5794C5D8BA@gmail.com>
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Message-ID: <7a1ba395-3075-4d1a-d210-75218062b054@pi.nu>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:56:18 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <8536B7D1-FBE7-403F-B635-7B5794C5D8BA@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/3VMn8p6gWqX1l158hp8WOxwAcXs>
Precedence: list

Yoar,

I looked at this - to see if I missed something - and the picture that
comes over is

Year    number of errata   working group
2005    1                  tewg
2010    5                  nsfv4
2011    1                  nsfv4
2012    1                  nsfv4
2013    11                 Legacy (gen), Poisson (gen), krb-wg (sec),
                            mext (int), nsfv4, non-wg (sec) x 2,
                            keyprov(sec) behave (tsv), non-wg (gen),
                            dane (sec)
2014     35                many wg's
2015     57                many wg's
2016    114                many wg's

I think there are one problem here that need to have some type of
management action. The tewg, nsfv4 and of the wg's with errata from
2013 only dane is still active.

The ADs might have to point to someone to resolve the (oldest) errata.
Or errata that belong to closed wg's.

/Loa


On 2016-09-12 10:29, Yoav Nir wrote:
> Hi
>
> I’ve just noticed that there are a lot (224 at this point in time) or reported errata that have not yet been handled ([1]).  Some of these are fairly recent, but a lot are from months or years ago, including 5 from 2010, 1 from 2005 (for RFC 3970 - “A Traffic Engineering (TE) MIB”)
>
> Is there some process for getting all these errata handled?  I know the usual process is that someone submits a report, ADs or WG chairs notice, and after a brief discussion the report is classified as Verified, Held for Document Update, or Rejected. But ISTM that some reports fall through the cracks.
>
> And sure, I only noticed because one of those 224 is mine...
>
> Yoav
>
> [1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rec_status=2&presentation=table
>

-- 


Loa Andersson                        email: loa@mail01.huawei.com
Senior MPLS Expert                          loa@pi.nu
Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64

Old Errata Yoav Nir
Re: Old Errata Loa Andersson
Re: Old Errata Stephen Farrell
Re: Old Errata Benoit Claise (bclaise)
Re: Old Errata Stephen Farrell
Re: Old Errata John C Klensin
Re: Old Errata Spencer Dawkins at IETF
Re: Old Errata Loa Andersson