Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices

An erratum saying "the text points to appendixes that are actually in
the ANSI standard it talks about" should be sufficient.


Done.  This makes two errata I have submitted for this RFC, which
should be enough.

R's,
John

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, (continued) Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, John C Klensin Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, Nico Williams Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, Julian Reschke Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, John Levine Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, Nico Williams Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, Julian Reschke Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, Nico Williams Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, Brian E Carpenter Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, Harald Alvestrand Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, Måns Nilsson Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, John Levine <= Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, John Levine Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, David Farmer Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, John Levine "nothing of importance" (was: Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices), Stephen Farrell Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, Tony Hansen Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices, ned+ietf