[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Updated erratum

To: ietf-usefor@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Updated erratum
From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 08:12:23 +0200
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-usefor/mail-archive/>
List-id: <ietf-usefor.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-usefor-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
Organization: <http://purl.net/xyzzy>
References: <g34jni$79t$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080616165259.GA5903@xxxxxxx><g3fdce$lve$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <g3ff47$pua$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: "Frank Ellermann" <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-ietf-usefor@xxxxxxxxxxxx

Posted on the rfc.interest list:
 
>| Errata ID: 1081 (2007-11) was updated by Errata ID: 1353 (2008-03).
>| The fix proposed in ID 1353 is clearly better, e.g., ID 1081 allowed
>| (in theory) a toplabel 1-2-3, but ID 1353 requires a leading letter.  
>|
>+ If ID 1353 is verified this should trigger follow-up errata for RFCs
>| 3696, 4408, and ietf-usefor-usefor.  This list might be incomplete.

It might be also too long, RFC.ietf-usefor-usefor could be fixed in
AUTH48:  "<toplabel> is any LDH <label> starting with a letter, and
consisting of at least two characters" is a straight forward concept.

 Frank

Prev by Date: Re: [Fwd]: 2822 implementation report request
Previous by thread: [Fwd]: 2822 implementation report request
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread