From nobody Thu Oct 15 13:03:54 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: usefor@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: usefor@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A13851A1A76 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:03:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id juIJdd9yKVpT for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:03:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from denver.dinauz.org (denver.dinauz.org [IPv6:2001:41d0:8:730b::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C38A81A1A72 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:03:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by denver.dinauz.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27D0460093; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 22:03:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from denver.dinauz.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (denver.dinauz.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MHYWCQ5ALKa7; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 22:03:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from macbook-pro-de-julien-elie.home (AAubervilliers-651-1-161-208.w81-249.abo.wanadoo.fr [81.249.172.208]) by denver.dinauz.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6FD0F6008A; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 22:03:47 +0200 (CEST) To: Harald Alvestrand , Barry Leiba , Charles Lindsey References: <20150908203158.449C0180207@rfc-editor.org> <561E8E75.5080903@alvestrand.no> <561EA86C.70309@trigofacile.com> <561F4A7B.60406@alvestrand.no> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Julien_=c3=89LIE?= Organization: TrigoFACILE -- http://www.trigofacile.com/ Message-ID: <562006A3.9080500@trigofacile.com> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 22:03:47 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <561F4A7B.60406@alvestrand.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: Alexey Melnikov , usefor@ietf.org, Russ Allbery , RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [usefor] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5537 (4468) X-BeenThere: usefor@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of usefor issues." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 20:03:52 -0000 Hi all, It seems that the current thread is not archived in https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/usefor Would it be possible to update the old address used to the current address? (And if possible, update all imc.org addresses to ietf.org in the contacts of the RFC Editor.) Maybe it is the reason of the lack of these mails in the archives. Another possibility would be that the list is in the Cc: recipients instead of To:. Thanks! -- Julien ÉLIE « – Essayons d'interroger ce garde habilement sans éveiller ses soupçons… – Hep ! Où est enfermé Assurancetourix ? » (Astérix) Le 15/10/2015 08:40, Harald Alvestrand a écrit : > On 10/14/2015 11:04 PM, Barry Leiba wrote: >>>> I'm fine with marking the erratum REJECTED. >>>> When doing that, could you please add Russ's comment so as to give more >>>> context for people that will eventually process that erratum in a future >>>> revision of the RFC? (If of course Russ and Harald are OK with that.) >>>> >>> I am not familiar with what can and cannot be done with an erratum, but I >>> think it is important that a permanent record of this problem is placed >>> somewhere so that, if ever we proceed to Draft Standard (unlikely, perhaps, >>> but nevertheless possible) then the matter will be picked up and the >>> situation regularized. >> Indeed. I plan to make it "held for document update". >> >> Barry > I think the limit to an erratum is that an erratum can't override a WG > decision. > "Held for document update" is fine for "someone needs to look at this > carefully if they are ever charged with updating the spec". > > In this case, my memory says that we deliberately chose to look away > from what existing implementations do and instead say how things should > function if people were allocating the pieces of functionality between > the components of the ecosystem that we were imagining in the way they > were imagined - in which the posting agent was under the user's control, > and could sensibly correct the user's mistakes, while the injecting > agent was under the service provider's control, and should insist on > things being correct before it got there. Real implementations don't > line up that neatly - the spec never says what the protocol between a > posting agent and an injecting agent is. > > This may have been the wrong decision in retrospect, but I think the > decision got made that way. From nobody Thu Oct 15 13:16:27 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: usefor@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: usefor@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ABDB1A01C6 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:16:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.978 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j9K2KGrQFTaC for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:16:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vk0-x236.google.com (mail-vk0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 081241A020A for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:16:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vkex70 with SMTP id x70so49443993vke.3 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:16:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=NJALm6641rK2A9JwYZKAicxPQ9rk13bqxl5BajkigTQ=; b=jbUL82zBmC2W7ro/nY55kC47Doj6VOun93jRglO5fAOYBuLSfHi/SXuFSmB2Vm7Tcj 0pwYF4TdviYm54BQ/w4dGWOKlEJQt0pHcei77vdjtGnAYEsVQG4+Q8rbG0F3fD1eruOn RYmVJPpIj/MPKFwLcxAa3653UqAN6CWyBN0U/PgL5S9ERa8Vkwnm658zXlOlbmt9SFfX QVQpmSw7xwc5NyRmjExKCBQzs8imw5rTZqgkPA6KzGCf2Ba0KFr5xM3cNVrSphtKbzQG TTIf+Z6nlR0v5WIxl5PNE83TD5JGGKzCqvK6a9lMF6z2sv9N9Kcd2BgIpwXpBPH3dhVV I6/w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.31.132.79 with SMTP id g76mr7553220vkd.40.1444940184105; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.31.54.65 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:16:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <562006A3.9080500@trigofacile.com> References: <20150908203158.449C0180207@rfc-editor.org> <561E8E75.5080903@alvestrand.no> <561EA86C.70309@trigofacile.com> <561F4A7B.60406@alvestrand.no> <562006A3.9080500@trigofacile.com> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:16:23 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: w98T47tCyOmZsl0Q9TfRkh3YeE0 Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: =?UTF-8?B?SnVsaWVuIMOJTElF?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: Charles Lindsey , Harald Alvestrand , usefor@ietf.org, Alexey Melnikov , Russ Allbery , RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [usefor] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5537 (4468) X-BeenThere: usefor@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of usefor issues." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 20:16:26 -0000 > Would it be possible to update the old address used to > the current address? (And if possible, update all imc.org > addresses to ietf.org in the contacts of the RFC Editor.) > Maybe it is the reason of the lack of these mails in the archives. Another > possibility would be that the list is in the Cc: recipients instead of To:. Yes, this has come up before. I will talk with the RFC Editor folks at the upcoming Yokohama IETF meeting (2.5 weeks hence) and see if there's a reasonable way for us to make contact information more up to date. We all know what to do in a specific case, but it's quite challenging to handle it in general. Barry