Re: [tsvwg] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7605 (4437)

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

Joe,

Thanks for the update.  In your discussions with the RFC Editor,
note that there are also two blank lines in the middle of the
first paragraph of the Introduction.  Not worth a separate
erratum, but another indication that something went wrong during
final review and/or formatting.

   john


--On Wednesday, August 12, 2015 11:28 -0700 Joe Touch
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> FWIW - I've contact the RFC-Editor about this; it isn't being
> ignored. I'll report back when I hear back.
> 
> Joe
> 
> On 8/7/2015 11:21 AM, RFC Errata System wrote:
>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7605,
>> "Recommendations on Using Assigned Transport Port Numbers".
>> 
>> --------------------------------------
>> You may review the report below and at:
>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7605&eid=4437
>> 
>> --------------------------------------
>> Type: Editorial
>> Reported by: John Klensin <[e-mail]>
>> 
>> Section: Abstract
>> 
>> Original Text
>> -------------
>> It provides designer guidance to requesters or users of port
>> numbers on how to interact with IANA using the processes
>> defined in RFC 6335; thus, this document complements (but
>> does not update) that document. It provides guidelines for
>> designers regarding how to interact with the IANA processes
>> defined in RFC 6335, thus serving to complement (but not
>> update) that document.
>> 
>> Corrected Text
>> --------------
>> It provides designer guidance to requesters or users of port
>> numbers on how to interact with IANA using the processes
>> defined in RFC 6335; thus, this document complements (but
>> does not update) that document.
>> 
>> Notes
>> -----
>> I think those two sentences say exactly the same thing and
>> that the presence of both indicates that someone wasn't
>> paying quite enough attention during AUTH48 or earlier.  If
>> they are intended to communicate different information, it
>> isn't clear what that is and the result is massively
>> confusing.
>> 
>> 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. 
>> 
>> --------------------------------------
>> RFC7605 (draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-use-11)
>> --------------------------------------
>> Title               : Recommendations on Using Assigned
>> Transport Port Numbers Publication Date    : August 2015
>> Author(s)           : J. Touch
>> Category            : BEST CURRENT PRACTICE
>> Source              : Transport Area Working Group
>> Area                : Transport
>> Stream              : IETF
>> Verifying Party     : IESG
>>