Re: [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC8200 (5933)

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

On 4/3/20 04:21, Ole Troan wrote:
> 
>> On 3 Mar 2020, at 22:43, Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> I didn't know what we meant to say, because I never thought for one
>> moment how the text applied to routing headers, where the destination
>> address essentially becomes a variable instead of a constant, and where
>> the Segments Left field is mutable by construction. So it isn't a "flea";
>> IMHO it's a major omission. (I feel a bit guilty, because we first missed
>> it in RFC7045.)
> 
> You should not feel guilty.
> Isn’t the IETF mantra to write specifications to ensure interoperability. The goal isn’t to write enough legalese to prohibit future uses (or abuses) of the specifications. 

Isn't there a procedure to update existing specs, when needed?  -- 
that's what some of us have been arguing about...

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492