On 12/21/12 1:33 AM, SM wrote:
I used RFC 5735 as an example. There is a message from the person who
submitted the erratum at
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/current/msg13689.html The
threads of the discussion are at
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/current/msg13645.html and
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/current/msg13681.html It's
difficult for the average reader to understand what is the current
"standard" when document status, "updates" and "obsoletes" requires
convoluted tracking.
I am still confused. What is the action item here? Do you think
something needs to be fixed in this document?
pr
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478