[rfc-i] Invalid URL in informational references

Дилян Палаузов dilyan.palauzov at aegee.org
Mon Jun 10 10:31:01 PDT 2019


when will it be decided on updating the RFC text with validated errara?  Or rather who will decide on this?

What are the concerns?  So far no concerns were expressed, apart from preserving the ability to track the changes over time.

Do we have the state “nobody wants to take decisions”?


On June 10, 2019 8:26:16 PM GMT+03:00, Russ Housley <housley at vigilsec.com> wrote:
>That looks like a straightforward editorial errata.
>> On Jun 10, 2019, at 12:58 PM, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf at elandsys.com>
>> Hello,
>> There is the following on Page 8 of in RFC 6483:
>"http://http://www.iana.org/assignments/as-numbers".  The URL is
>> Regards,
>> S. Moonesamy
>> _______________________________________________
>> rfc-interest mailing list
>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>rfc-interest mailing list
>rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20190610/b1e145d2/attachment.html>

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list