Re: [Rswg] Errata report notification (Re: [rsab] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9280 (7795))

[Jean Mahoney <[e-mail]>]

John,

On 2/6/24 3:58 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
> Jean,
> 
> I don't think this is quite right and, unless there have been
> change recently, it may not be consistent with what I have
> observed over the years, even the last couple of years.  My
> impression is that:
> 
> (1) According to RFC 9280, the RSAB consists of "stream
> representatives".  Especially for the IETF Stream (and even more
> especially for standards track and BCP documents), if the stream
> representative were appointed for expertise in editorial policy
> generally or RFC Series issues, they may not have the expertise
> needed to make technical judgments on claimed errors or even
> have more expertise than the RPC has about who would be the
> right person or group to whom to refer the alleged error.  So I
> don't see strong justification for the RSAB to be involved at
> all except for documents that, perhaps because of age, the RPC
> cannot figure out how to route or even to which stream the error
> should be reported.

[JM] I should have clarified that the following notification lists are 
for Editorial Stream documents only:

<snip>
>>
>> The errata system is currently set up to send errata report
>> notifications to the following:
>>
>>      For technical errata reports:
>>
>>         To: authors, RSAB
>>         CC: reporter, [e-mail]
>>
>>      For editorial errata reports:
>>
>>         To: [e-mail]
>>         CC: reporter, authors

[JM] The errata system can be updated to notify RSWG for both report 
types. RSAB would be the verifier for Editorial Stream technical issues 
(that is, for errata that would change the meaning of the text) and the 
RPC would verify editorial errata (e.g., typos). RSAB can consult with 
RSWG when working through any reports.

Best regards,
Jean

>>
>> Note that the RPC verifies reports that are of editorial
>> nature (e.g., basic typos, punctuation mistakes, etc.). If we
>> cannot verify the report (i.e., the suggested correction
>> changes the meaning of the text), we will set the report type
>> to "technical" and forward it to the verifier of technical
>> reports. For instance, I would consider the change described
>> in this report to be beyond editorial.
>>
>> We can add RSWG to the CC: list for both types of reports.
>> RSAB is considered the verifying party for technical reports.
>> Please let us know if any other changes to notifications are
>> required.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Jean
>>
>>
>> On 2/5/24 5:42 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) wrote:
>>> Thanks Eliot for forwarding.
>>>
>>> If I see this correctly, this errata report was only send to
>>> [e-mail]. This seems to be the right address
>>> to handle  the errata, however, as we do also send IETF/IRTF
>>> errata to the  respective working/research group, I think it
>>> would be good to send all  errata reports for the editorial
>>> stream also to RSWG (and probably also  RSAB).
>>>
>>> Mirja
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 3. Feb 2024, at 09:43, Eliot Lear <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> FYI and for discussion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>>> Return-Path: 	<[e-mail]>
>>>> Authentication-Results: 	upstairs.ofcourseimright.com;
>>>> dmarc=none  (p=none dis=none) header.from=rfc-editor.org
>>>> Received: 	from rfcpa.amsl.com (rfcpa.amsl.com
>>>> [50.223.129.200]) by  upstairs.ofcourseimright.com
>>>> (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-22ubuntu3) with  ESMTPS id
>>>> 4138et9h1897964 (version=TLSv1.3
>>>> cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for
>>>> <[e-mail]>;  Sat, 3 Feb 2024 09:40:57 +0100
>>>> Received: 	by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id
>>>> 24DBB11821EE; Sat, 3 Feb 2024 00:40:54 -0800 (PST)
>>>> To: 	[e-mail]
>>>> Subject: 	[Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9280 (7795)
>>>> From: 	RFC Errata System <[e-mail]>
>>>> Cc: 	[e-mail], [e-mail]
>>>> Content-Type: 	text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>>>> Message-Id: 	<[e-mail]>
>>>> Date: 	Sat, 3 Feb 2024 00:40:54 -0800 (PST)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9280,
>>>> "RFC Editor Model (Version 3)".
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>> You may review the report below and at:
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7795
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>> Type: Editorial
>>>> Reported by: Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>
>>>>
>>>> Section: 8
>>>>
>>>> Original Text
>>>> -------------
>>>> Updates, amendments, and refinements to this document can be
>>>> produced using the process documented herein but shall be
>>>> published and operative only after (a) obtaining the
>>>> agreement of the IAB and the IESG and (b) ensuring that the
>>>> IETF LLC has no objections regarding its ability to
>>>> implement any proposed changes.
>>>>
>>>> Corrected Text
>>>> --------------
>>>> Updates, amendments, and refinements to this document can be
>>>> produced using the process documented herein but, unless
>>>> otherwise specified in this document, shall be published and
>>>> operative only after (a) obtaining the agreement of the IAB
>>>> and the IESG and (b) ensuring that the IETF LLC has no
>>>> objections regarding its ability to implement any proposed
>>>> changes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Notes
>>>> -----
>>>> Section 7 explicitly states:
>>>>
>>>> "Proposals that affect these properties are possible within
>>>> the  processes defined in this document."
>>>>
>>>> And it goes on from there to discuss RSWG/RSAB review.
>>>>
>>>> Therefore, it should not be necessary for the IAB, IESG, and
>>>> LLC to  approve changes in Section 7. That is just a
>>>> for-instance. There may  be other examples.
>>>>
>>>> Instructions:
>>>> -------------
>>>> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is
>>>> spam, it  will be removed shortly by the RFC Production
>>>> Center.) Please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should
>>>> be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the
>>>> verifying party will log in  to change the status and edit
>>>> the report, if necessary.
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>> RFC9280 (draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-13)
>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>> Title : RFC Editor Model (Version 3)
>>>> Publication Date : June 2022
>>>> Author(s) : P. Saint-Andre, Ed.
>>>> Category : INFORMATIONAL
>>>> Source : IAB
>>>> Area : N/A
>>>> Stream : IAB
>>>> Verifying Party : IAB
>>>>
>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> RSAB mailing list
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rsab
>>>
> 
>