On Monday 25 February 2008 18:46, Frank Ellermann wrote:
Hi, apart from one tricky issue our 4408-errata page is IMO
in good shape. At the moment the RFC-editor folks still
list it as "reported" instead of "verified". There was a
backlog of about 300 pending errata for some years, that's
now cleaned up.
The proposed procedure is that if each IETF area director
tackles two unverified errata per month they hope to be
up to date within a year (starting 2008-02). I'd like to
propose the 4408-errata as a kind of low hanging fruit, is
that okay for you ?
Actually I wanted to do it earlier (before 2008-02-03), but
I didn't know that there are "only" 300 unverified errata,
and that the I* accepted "confirmation by area director" as
strategy for errata affecting IETF RFCs.
What's the tricky issue?
Scott K
-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=2183229&id_secret=95887956-51703a
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com