[Editorial Errata Reported] RFC4960 (2592)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Fri, 29 October 2010 13:33 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A45023A6A46 for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 06:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.108, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_52=0.6, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ei2WnZIjeTCU for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 06:33:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:1112:1::2f]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D98413A6944 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 06:33:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id A1E38E06EF; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 06:35:21 -0700 (PDT)
To: rrs@cisco.com, ietfdbh@comcast.net, lars.eggert@nokia.com, jmpolk@cisco.com, gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk
Subject: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC4960 (2592)
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20101029133521.A1E38E06EF@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 06:35:21 -0700
Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, tsvwg@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tsvwg>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:33:27 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC4960,
"Stream Control Transmission Protocol".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4960&eid=2592

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com>

Section: 14.1

Original Text
-------------
14.1.  IETF-Defined Chunk Extension

   The assignment of new chunk parameter type codes is done through an
   IETF Consensus action, as defined in [RFC2434].  Documentation of the
   chunk parameter MUST contain the following information:


Corrected Text
--------------
14.1.  IETF-Defined Chunk Extension

   The assignment of new chunk type codes is done through an
IETF Consensus action, as defined in [RFC2434].  Documentation of the
chunk type MUST contain the following information:


Notes
-----
The OLD text relates to parameter types, and not chunk types, and already appears, correctly, in section 14.2.  Section 14.1 is about chunk types,as the NEW text says.

Instructions:
-------------
This errata 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. 

--------------------------------------
RFC4960 (draft-ietf-tsvwg-2960bis-05)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Stream Control Transmission Protocol
Publication Date    : September 2007
Author(s)           : R. Stewart, Ed.
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Transport Area Working Group
Area                : Transport
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG