Re: [Iptel] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC3966 (4376)
OKUMURA Shinji <ietf.shinji@gmail.com> Wed, 27 May 2015 11:30 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf.shinji@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: iptel@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iptel@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE7711ACDFD for <iptel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 May 2015 04:30:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.899
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FSL_HELO_FAKE=3.899, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lr-kfDD6_9NQ for <iptel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 May 2015 04:30:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pd0-x235.google.com (mail-pd0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EFA41ACDFB for <iptel@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 May 2015 04:30:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pdfh10 with SMTP id h10so10873593pdf.3 for <iptel@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 May 2015 04:30:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references:message-id; bh=QKdW0tEKpJeInxrzmEH5wJ9/dD1GAJ4jhMBw39ucK2Y=; b=lFscjODOAE8hSdvcuM0JJAxuxb6lJ7yHWw05Fo+A7/6cm5ORNTaaV0opo1EXnS+vTD u8ucMLLHzvykqCD9EZQyb8SHvlZnYi21mCGV4FD/ktVM9ObCK+wfekkhlc7iUh3HnPBR cu65rIZS31kl08DxJ5719Wn44u2xxka3CbsmODawTiVD+8ZHGPLXEyc1wV3vPIlhaQJk kYzzFXT7WGvpChfIYXVzj7Aaqcn7rt9U1hEyyRFqNyo8yV3hyZyeF+5XjPj5gZWOrW5d sOKsne50rW5CvhUBEUKN+od4zCj+q+sn8jZv0qICCBDIRNjw1i67pY643aqLJelX4IXV aGSQ==
X-Received: by 10.68.235.38 with SMTP id uj6mr58054436pbc.57.1432726249136; Wed, 27 May 2015 04:30:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gmail.com (softbank219041195068.bbtec.net. [219.41.195.68]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id qi6sm15916292pbb.94.2015.05.27.04.30.45 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 27 May 2015 04:30:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: OKUMURA Shinji <ietf.shinji@gmail.com>
To: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, "hgs@cs.columbia.edu" <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>, "ben@nostrum.com" <ben@nostrum.com>, "alissa@cooperw.in" <alissa@cooperw.in>, "jdrosen@cisco.com" <jdrosen@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 20:30:37 +0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: HidemaruMail 6.45 (WinNT,601)
In-Reply-To: <D18A12D9.1033C2%jason_livingood@cable.comcast.com>
References: <20150526154737.6666D180207@rfc-editor.org> <D18A12D9.1033C2%jason_livingood@cable.comcast.com>
Message-Id: <CD098708DF903D876E8D0@gmail.com>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iptel/IpBbTQ-OpgQ6D4yDILlY6PVbPME>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 30 May 2015 16:28:00 -0700
Cc: "iptel@ietf.org" <iptel@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Iptel] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC3966 (4376)
X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IP Telephony <iptel.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iptel>, <mailto:iptel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/iptel/>
List-Post: <mailto:iptel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iptel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel>, <mailto:iptel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 11:30:51 -0000
Hi, phonedigit is used in an extension rule. extension = ";ext=" 1*phonedigit if the original definition is correct, I think a following description is valid. tel:1234;ext=;phone-context=example.com May an extension number be an empty string? At the very start what is the reason why visual-separator became an optional rule? according to the document history, RFC2806 phonedigit = DIGIT / visual-separator draft-ietf-iptel-rfc2806bis-01 phonedigit = DIGIT [ visual-separator ] phonedigit-hex = HEXDIG [ visual-separator ] draft-ietf-iptel-rfc2806bis-02 phonedigit = DIGIT / [ visual-separator ] phonedigit-hex = HEXDIG / "*" / "#" / [ visual-separator ] Anydody know the intent of this fix? Regards, Shinji >This errata should be rejected. > >- Jason > > > >On 5/26/15, 11:47 AM, "RFC Errata System" <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> >wrote: > >>The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3966, >>"The tel URI for Telephone Numbers". >> >>-------------------------------------- >>You may review the report below and at: >>http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3966&eid=4376 >> >>-------------------------------------- >>Type: Editorial >>Reported by: OKUMURA Shinji <ietf.shinji@gmail.com> >> >>Section: 3 >> >>Original Text >>------------- >>phonedigit = DIGIT / [ visual-separator ] >>phonedigit-hex = HEXDIG / "*" / "#" / [ visual-separator ] >> >> >>Corrected Text >>-------------- >>phonedigit = DIGIT / visual-separator; >>phonedigit-hex = HEXDIG / "*" / "#" / visual-separator; >> >> >>Notes >>----- >>An optional and alternative rule is typically meaningless. >> >>Instructions: >>------------- >>This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please >>use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >>rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) >>can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. >> >>-------------------------------------- >>RFC3966 (draft-ietf-iptel-rfc2806bis-09) >>-------------------------------------- >>Title : The tel URI for Telephone Numbers >>Publication Date : December 2004 >>Author(s) : H. Schulzrinne >>Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >>Source : IP Telephony >>Area : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure >>Stream : IETF >>Verifying Party : IESG >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Iptel mailing list >>Iptel@ietf.org >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >>
- [Iptel] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC3966 (4376) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Iptel] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC3966 (… Livingood, Jason
- Re: [Iptel] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC3966 (… OKUMURA Shinji
- Re: [Iptel] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC3966 (… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Iptel] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC3966 (… OKUMURA Shinji
- Re: [Iptel] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC3966 (… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Iptel] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC3966 (… OKUMURA Shinji
- [Iptel] [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC3966… RFC Errata System