RFC Errata


Errata Search

 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 1 record.

Status: Rejected (1)

RFC 4363, "Definitions of Managed Objects for Bridges with Traffic Classes, Multicast Filtering, and Virtual LAN Extensions", January 2006

Source of RFC: bridge (ops)

Errata ID: 2680

Status: Rejected
Type: Editorial

Reported By: *Zhong* Qiyao
Date Reported: 2011-01-04
Rejected by: Ron Bonica
Date Rejected: 2011-01-24

Section MIB says:

> Dear IETF Person-in-Charge,
>
>      We found that Q-BRIDGE-MIB (RFC 2674) had its content corrected
> using the RFC 4363.
>
>      While this kind of update and grammatical correction is a good
> thing,
> we found that:
>
> << old ("which" as correlative pronoun)
>        "The number of valid frames received by this port from
>        its segment which were classified as belonging to this
>        VLAN which were discarded due to VLAN related reasons.
>        Specifically, the IEEE 802.1Q counters for Discard
>        Inbound and Discard on Ingress Filtering."
> >>
>
> << new ("that" as correlative pronoun)
>        "The number of valid frames received by this port from
>        its segment that were classified as belonging to this
>        VLAN and that were discarded due to VLAN-related reasons.
>        Specifically, the IEEE 802.1Q counters for Discard
>        Inbound and Discard on Ingress Filtering."
> >>
>
>      According to our education, "which" is correct, and "that" is
> only
> colloquial.  But Microsoft Word seems to reject the use of "which" in
> such
> situations, and it may have mis-lead IETF into thinking that the Q-
> BRIDGE-MIB
> should remove "which" and use "that", which is a pity.
>
>      Thanks.
>
>                                        Qiyao #3165 &#37758;&#21855;&#22575;&#12288;&#19978;
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Zhong* Qiyao, Xinzhu, Tajvano ~{VSFtR"~}
> Greg 2009.12.13-19
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notes:

Many places.
--VERIFIER NOTES--
Please see http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS_FAQ/Whichvs.That/Whichvs.That01.html for details

Ron Bonica

Report New Errata