Re: [Netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6241 (3821)

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Tue, 10 December 2013 14:36 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CCF81AC403 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 06:36:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.793] 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 R5k85MZu8FcP for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 06:36:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (unknown [109.74.15.94]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBE3E1A1F65 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 06:36:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (138.162.241.83.in-addr.dgcsystems.net [83.241.162.138]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9BC8E240C038; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 15:36:51 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 15:36:51 +0100 (CET)
Message-Id: <20131210.153651.1182516105923318005.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: bertietf@bwijnen.net
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <52A7244A.4090006@bwijnen.net>
References: <52A62972.4010001@bwijnen.net> <20131210.132819.2303764306420511964.mbj@tail-f.com> <52A7244A.4090006@bwijnen.net>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5rc2 on Emacs 23.4 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: rob.enns@gmail.com, joelja@bogus.com, netconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6241 (3821)
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 14:36:59 -0000

[fixing andy's address]

"Bert Wijnen (IETF)" <bertietf@bwijnen.net>; wrote:
> Martin, did you mean to make this statement for all 3 reported errata,
> or just for 3821?

All three.

Editorial errata is fine with me. 


/martin


> 
> If anyone disagrees with Martin's assessment, pls speak up NOW.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bert
> 
> On 12/10/13 1:28 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > "Bert Wijnen (IETF)" <bertietf@bwijnen.net>; wrote:
> >> We have a set of 3 new errata reported to RFC6241.
> >> See:
> >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6241&rec_status=15&presentation=table
> >>
> >> We would like to hear from the authors/editors what their
> >> opinion is on the reported errata.
> >
> > I think the proposed text is fine, however I do not know if it
> > qualifies as an errata.  IMO it clarifies the description of
> > confirmed-commit, but the current text is not wrong.
> >
> >
> > /martin
> >
> >
>