IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [yam] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6409 (3995)

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Mon, 26 May 2014 15:06 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: yam@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: yam@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 405081A018C for <yam@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 May 2014 08:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 mU6hWIh_8rYv for <yam@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 May 2014 08:06:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-x233.google.com (mail-vc0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59F511A0188 for <yam@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 May 2014 08:06:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vc0-f179.google.com with SMTP id im17so9385939vcb.10 for <yam@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 May 2014 08:06:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=3OiNXDbxPR9lKfrxZ3YYkkFCHLH2JX05QFGKV0a/0YE=; b=IfzfobCqntarZFnYlIj3F0+ap0S+dCYaDHP5zJJthJdW7CxyB1G7RP3NfuBcxvHnli BMUuL13Vw2ZbvVcUafpha1VbZLl+r1VZYfNEYRqemLcW9Mjsk40AJDCzCvClIPZ1ptlv gztz+Nt8wazs1xnNBGfSCxC/KB//MG+miiXCsIo9j/0HzmBuz0iihJGcoZZkbqal6WHk whb+e7g5ZLqBjBfIdxWu4OkCmVV2LR1Mnw9B6c+vENkU4WM00tPcAgdRRzcRvR32lu/R cYTxNM90JQPnzEMDPlOfWBPXpxvudqRMJwmjhlmQrZSyopL4qRpSmKCn16E6TIGrD9FI PzCw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.221.5.1 with SMTP id oe1mr21830125vcb.10.1401116779135; Mon, 26 May 2014 08:06:19 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com
Received: by 10.58.33.199 with HTTP; Mon, 26 May 2014 08:06:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <E1C9935044E562D41D6B9FE8@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
References: <20140522105930.779E218000D@rfc-editor.org> <p06240600cfa513ac7ab4@99.111.97.136> <1CD96F1912CBFF4A6A296711@192.168.1.102> <p06240604cfa5730dd57a@99.111.97.136> <CALaySJKCTkk7A=c83VJxwxpyZyDRN6oQcmDJc2NP26e0+HmFKw@mail.gmail.com> <E45DDA85C9C092E7F6D7EF90@192.168.1.102> <p06240601cfa69e50f9d0@99.111.97.136> <E1C9935044E562D41D6B9FE8@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 11:06:19 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: c7tuzIGZJoA2ak8zmKToXWx9Aq8
Message-ID: <CAC4RtVD5G9cxobF2DurrNqnKyW-kMTpdVqcGbj=bQwtV2dRfJA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/yam/ZWnQmLfYSmkh5oKVe8FrbcOjsYI
Cc: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Randall Gellens <rg+ietf@qualcomm.com>, Yet Another Mail Working Group <yam@ietf.org>, SM <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Subject: Re: [yam] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6409 (3995)
X-BeenThere: yam@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Yet Another Mail working group discussion list <yam.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yam/>
List-Post: <mailto:yam@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 15:06:23 -0000

>> Consider the work to add the clarifications as a down payment
>> on the work of any eventual revision, or insurance that a
>> revision will be done without forgetting this discussion now.
>> Or, if it's worth publishing the errata, it's worth noting
>> that it isn't quite right.
>
> Wfm, noting however that, in my role as keeper of the XML with
> comments, etc., I've already marked this change --with a note
> that the text isn't quite right-- into the source that would be
> used to build 6409bis if Randy and I were to do it.  My previous
> note was written with that in mind.

OK... then please agree on an exact wording change to the errata
report, and I will get the change made.

Barry

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email