[rfc-i] References to errata

"Martin J. Dürst" duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Sun Apr 13 21:13:34 PDT 2014

On 2014/04/12 06:22, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2014-04-11 19:26, Russ Housley wrote:
>> ...

>> 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.

Yes. What about something like
      Erratum ID NNNN for RFC MMMMM
or   Erratum ID NNNN (applies to RFC MMMMM)
or anything else in that direction?

Regards,   Martin.

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list