Processing of erratum reports (was Re: Processing errata for RFC 4648)

[Jean Mahoney <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

On 1/3/26 1:46 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Am 03.01.2026 um 20:42 schrieb Brian E Carpenter:
>> Yes, processing errata in IETF RFCs is an AD responsibility, and as 

[JM] Correct, for RFCs from the IETF Stream, it is the responsibility of 
the Area Directors to review and verify erratum reports. Each Stream has 
one or more verifiers who can process reports. For details, please see
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rpc-errata-process/


>> far as I know, there is no errata software reminding the ADs, so it 
>> often slips right down the priority list. There's a large backlog

[JM] An automated message containing links to the open reports is sent 
monthly to the stream-specific parties who review and verify reports, 
but it's up to those reviewers to prioritize this work.


>>
>> RFC 4648 was produced by the former Applications Area so IMHO it 
>> should be ART's job.

[JM] The errata system maps the reports for RFCs from closed or 
rearranged Areas to current Areas so that notifications go to the 
correct ADs. For a detailed example, please see the following writeup 
for the creation of the WIT Area:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=wgs_changed_area


Best regards,
Jean


>> ...
> 
> Indeed, I mis-remembered. In HTTPbis we frequently discuss errata and 
> then just *assume* that the AD will approve.
> 
> Best regards, Julian
>