IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Errata for RFC 5536 and 5537

Julien ÉLIE <julien@trigofacile.com> Tue, 19 January 2010 21:13 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-ietf-usefor@mail.imc.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-usefor-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-usefor-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A64883A67D8 for <ietfarch-usefor-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:13:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.988
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.988 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.757, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001]
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 j17dh+u4-7GA for <ietfarch-usefor-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:13:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 630B93A67F7 for <usefor-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:13:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o0JLBvau089617 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:11:57 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-usefor@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id o0JLBv3B089616; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:11:57 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-usefor@mail.imc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: balder-227.proper.com: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-usefor@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from 66.mail-out.ovh.net (66.mail-out.ovh.net [91.121.185.67]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with SMTP id o0JLBspZ089607 for <ietf-usefor@imc.org>; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:11:55 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from julien@trigofacile.com)
Received: (qmail 20165 invoked by uid 503); 19 Jan 2010 21:10:12 -0000
Received: from 42.mail-out.ovh.net (213.251.189.42) by 66.mail-out.ovh.net with SMTP; 19 Jan 2010 21:10:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 19808 invoked by uid 503); 19 Jan 2010 21:10:55 -0000
Received: from b9.ovh.net (HELO mail416.ha.ovh.net) (213.186.33.59) by 42.mail-out.ovh.net with SMTP; 19 Jan 2010 21:10:55 -0000
Received: from b0.ovh.net (HELO queueout) (213.186.33.50) by b0.ovh.net with SMTP; 19 Jan 2010 21:10:34 -0000
Received: from aaubervilliers-151-1-66-216.w81-48.abo.wanadoo.fr (HELO Iulius) (julien%trigofacile.com@81.48.9.216) by ns0.ovh.net with SMTP; 19 Jan 2010 21:10:32 -0000
Message-ID: <D10A59D725AC4F7AAB8DBF51856104C3@Iulius>
From: Julien ÉLIE <julien@trigofacile.com>
To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa.dusseault@gmail.com>
Cc: murch@andrew.cmu.edu, chl@clerew.man.ac.uk, dan@dankohn.com, alexey.melnikov@isode.com, harald@alvestrand.no, ah@tr-sys.de, ietf-usefor@imc.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
References: <B157978910364703AC5A46E0CB5EC876@Iulius> <ca722a9e1001191235g35ee752ep273e0d32880670a2@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ca722a9e1001191235g35ee752ep273e0d32880670a2@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Errata for RFC 5536 and 5537
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 22:10:35 +0100
Organization: TrigoFACILE -- http://www.trigofacile.com/
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18005
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18005
X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 2290080411501067657
X-Ovh-Remote: 81.48.9.216 (aaubervilliers-151-1-66-216.w81-48.abo.wanadoo.fr)
X-Ovh-Local: 213.186.33.20 (ns0.ovh.net)
X-Spam-Check: DONE|U 0.5/N
Sender: owner-ietf-usefor@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-usefor/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-usefor-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <ietf-usefor.imc.org>

Hi Lisa,

> Done.  The editorial ones I marked "hold for document update" because
> the terminology issues won't affect an implementation's correctness,
> and I do not like making implementers wade through terminology
> corrections looking for technical errata.

OK, thanks!


> 1980 -> it should be reworded as follows, and VERIFIED.

http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=1980

The correction is inconsistent and wrong.

I do not understand why we have:

---------------------------------------------------
Throughout the document, when it says:

(a)  Section 3.1, last paragraph:

|        ... trace headers ...

(b)  Section 3.4.4, second paragraph:

|        ... a References header, ...

(c)  Section 3.5, numbered processing steps:
---------------------------------------------------
It should say:

(a)  Section 3.1, last paragraph:

|       ... trace header fields ...

(b)  Section 3.4.4, second paragraph:

|        ... a References header field, ...

(c)  Section 3.5, numbered processing steps:


Julian Elie suggests the corrected text:

Corrected Text
--------------
(a)  Section 3.1, last paragraph:

|       ... trace header fields ...

(b)  Section 3.4, fourth paragraph:

|       ... an Injection-Date header field.

(c)  Section 3.4.4, second paragraph:
---------------------------------------------------

It does not match the letters (a), (b), (c), etc.


I thought that the new original text I suggested was to be put
instead of the previous original text.  And my corrected text
instead of the previous corrected text.  And also my suggestion
of note.  Otherwise, everything is inconsistent.


Besides, the original text contains a typo:


g)  Section 5.2.3, first paragraph:
(
                                                 [...]  The syntax of
|  its Control header field is:



And all my corrected text is badly formatted.  It was not what
I suggested at all!
Missing leading spaces, (d) totally wrong...

Could you please fix it?

Thanks beforehand,

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

« Ex nihilo nihil. » (Perse)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email