[rfc-i] Pre-qualifying errata [was Re: Errata proposal]

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Tue Aug 21 07:51:18 PDT 2012


On 2012-08-21 16:38, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> [Changing subject to refocus discussion]
>
> On 08/20/2012 01:44 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> On Aug 20, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug at acm.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to propose to add some text to the errata web page[1] asking
>>> a potential submitter to first discuss the errata with the authors of the
>>> RFC and/or on the appropriate mailing-list.
>>>
>>> Errata are difficult to track[2] for implementers and so I think that we
>>> should be very cautious before adding one.  The last[3] errata added for
>>> RFC 5389 is a good example of someone who mistook the errata database
>>> for stackoverflow.com.
>>>
>>> So I would like to propose to add something like this in bold characters
>>> to the web page:
>>>
>>> "We strongly suggest to discuss with the authors of the RFC or in the
>>> mailing-list that originated this RFC before submitting a new errata."
>>
>> +1
>>
>
> I think that the text should include a default mailing-list in case authors
> emails are no longer valid and there is no obvious mailing-list to send a
> message to.  Something like this:
>
> "We strongly suggest to discuss with the authors of the RFC or in the
> mailing-list that originated this RFC before submitting a new errata.  In last
> resort, the discussion about a new erratum can be started on ietf at ietf.org."
> ...

+1, but then for an outside it'll be hard to find out what the right 
mailing list is; optionally, we would preserve that information in the 
documents we publish.

Best regards, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list