Re: [rfc-i] Soliciting feedback: starting a satisfaction survey for the RFC Production Center and Publisher

Дилян Палаузов <> Wed, 16 January 2019 18:49 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2080E130E99 for <>; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 10:49:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (4096-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GmBgXgkPS4_L for <>; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 10:49:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B32DB130E8E for <>; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 10:49:34 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results:; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=didopalauzov
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=k4096; t=1547664570;; r=y; bh=FeA2l+9Vbj0NGzQg5jnSA9wp1g0jQav17EVWhnZg+AI=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=hgCoBIp0G/l3O3/ohupLviUzraXQSVLQw+/rMCMU3tluf/IjmDeLiqGeNbpjsrfcA QYV/kZW7TSIeQjO50g3PWtKqn4bCu4TsL0YGrPGNkj8q5tNe3PHOQrEpKJJmPIgc2k OW0mH+RJb3EUIHEhrhoF0MserlwvGd0isEjPp9ME9fBYlWN6UjIuH7kWHMjmwngnO8 AHYj0GW3f0I538kj8fyQtItzlH0zYK2iKEAtFvngqp2ikHnK5Whm0A7kHjfvXKZ+9c X7YjABHtRyDxuJ0rZo21Tl0Z20xyNntDNYmAgVh54MlaCtWKxd+EXkqg5M1GH1hKf5 717s5gByEBVJjI0wt75EWUG9XjAEdYo8UlyF+TfgzpvGV6S4KgiW0k3ElM5axrSq26 tw3IcmB/V/kClAsPSOoaZUODmqRr7eafLVOoyt3+yMb2yVzs/IG1n02GRAn84CtYi5 NSKlsFmgupm40vgtRWafV8irNuyr6CgAURjzMuq5rpOJMTG7gv1X3UtpQL72kJ1B20 NAmgdPpRtJPjA5VI6LmArGSvxnV80FL7IWrE0dY6M5ypYw3sGd2PXxg3W25qyOj+H0 +MTXlKIUrKOSMmwMx51LCvMBGoZ8f/tGpl/TYY/uVtZqWU/67f0eL2eIIlwXAxDsEX XIYpOG/7amvlL5hSTkVvCwm8=
Authentication-Results:; dkim=none
Received: from Tylan ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x0GInOY1020509 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 16 Jan 2019 18:49:24 GMT
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Soliciting feedback: starting a satisfaction survey for the RFC Production Center and Publisher
From: =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=94=D0=B8=D0=BB=D1=8F=D0=BD_?= =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=9F=D0=B0=D0=BB=D0=B0=D1=83=D0=B7=D0=BE=D0=B2?= <>
To: Heather Flanagan <>,
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 18:49:23 +0000
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.31.90
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.101.1 at
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 18:49:37 -0000


> What one thing would make the editing process easier or more effective? [Free form text]

Post publication editing:

I joined this mailing list proposing integrating the validated errata in the RFCs, without necessary creating a separate
RFC with distinct number for the update.

The idea is that readers can just pick a document (RFC), read it and don’t struggle with fixed misconsistencies in the
document, already clarified in the errata.