Subject: [Cellar] bug in the ebml document

From: Dave Rice <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 14:10:37 -0500

Hi Cellar,

draft-ietf-cellar-ebml-17 is currently in the RFC editor queue, but we found a bug in the naming of two elements defined within the document. I filed an issue at https://github.com/cellar-wg/ebml-specification/issues/336 <https://github.com/cellar-wg/ebml-specification/issues/336> and offered a pull request at https://github.com/cellar-wg/ebml-specification/pull/337/files <https://github.com/cellar-wg/ebml-specification/pull/337/files>.

Any advise on how to handle this given the document is already in the editor’s queue. Should we just merge the pull request and upload a version 18?

Dave

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 14:49:22 -0600

Hi, Dave,

On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 1:10 PM Dave Rice <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hi Cellar,
>
> draft-ietf-cellar-ebml-17 is currently in the RFC editor queue, but we
> found a bug in the naming of two elements defined within the document. I
> filed an issue at
> https://github.com/cellar-wg/ebml-specification/issues/336 and offered a
> pull request at
> https://github.com/cellar-wg/ebml-specification/pull/337/files.
>
> Any advise on how to handle this given the document is already in the
> editor’s queue. Should we just merge the pull request and upload a version
> 18?
>

My suggestion is to leave the pull request in place, and that we let the
responsible AD and RFC Editor know. This looks like a minor technical
correction, the working group is aware of it, and authors do have a chance
to coordinate with the RFC Editor on changes to documents that have been
approved and are already in queue, either now or at AUTH48, depending on
the preference of the RFC Editor.

Michael, does that sound right to you?

Best,

SPencer