[Errata Rejected] RFC5952 (3884)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 12 February 2014 14:30 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F9451A09A1; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 06:30:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.45
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.45 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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_LKSddrx-J; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 06:29:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2607:f170:8000:1500::d3]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 326B91A09A0; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 06:29:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 6BB1E7FC393; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 06:29:57 -0800 (PST)
To: richih.mailinglist@gmail.com, kawamucho@mesh.ad.jp, kawashimam@vx.jp.nec.com
Subject: [Errata Rejected] RFC5952 (3884)
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20140212142957.6BB1E7FC393@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 06:29:57 -0800
Cc: brian@innovationslab.net, ipv6@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:30:02 -0000
The following errata report has been rejected for RFC5952, "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5952&eid=3884 -------------------------------------- Status: Rejected Type: Technical Reported by: Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist@gmail.com> Date Reported: 2014-02-06 Rejected by: Brian Haberman (IESG) Section: 4.2.2. Original Text ------------- 4.2.2. Handling One 16-Bit 0 Field The symbol "::" MUST NOT be used to shorten just one 16-bit 0 field. For example, the representation 2001:db8:0:1:1:1:1:1 is correct, but 2001:db8::1:1:1:1:1 is not correct. Corrected Text -------------- 4.2.2. Incorrect use of "::" The symbol "::" MUST NOT be used to shorten just one 16-bit 0 field. For example, the representation 2001:db8:0:1:1:1:1:1 is correct, but 2001:db8::1:1:1:1:1 is not correct. The symbol "::" MUST NOT be used just so. For example, the representation 2001:db8:1:1:1:1:1:1 is correct, but 2001:db8:1:1::1:1:1:1 is not correct. Notes ----- You would think this should be obvious, but I have seen actual discussions that 2001:db8:1:1::1:1:1:1 is correct syntax. Explicitly forbidding this form does no harm and stops all discussions in this direction. Thanks for your work. --VERIFIER NOTES-- As agreed to by the document authors and the submitter, there is a reference to RFC 4291 that addresses the concern. -------------------------------------- RFC5952 (draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation-07) -------------------------------------- Title : A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation Publication Date : August 2010 Author(s) : S. Kawamura, M. Kawashima Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : IPv6 Maintenance Area : Internet Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [Errata Rejected] RFC5952 (3884) RFC Errata System
- [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5952 (3884) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5952 (3884) Seiichi Kawamura
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5952 (3884) Richard Hartmann