[rfc-i] References to errata

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Fri Apr 11 14:22:16 PDT 2014


On 2014-04-11 19:26, Russ Housley wrote:
> ...
> Based on the context from the earlier discussion, the RFCXXXX-NNNN was described as the NNNNth errata submitted against RFC XXXX.  My comments were made with that context in mind.
>
> Regardless, I still think that the format needs to label the RFC number and the errata number.  I'm happy with:  [ErrNNNN]  RFC Errata, Erratum ID NNNN, RFC MMMM.
> ....

It needs to label both.

The question is whether a

   Erratum ID NNNN, RFC MMMMM

makes sense for something which is not a reference to RFC MMMM.

Best regards, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list