Subject: [tsvwg] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC4960 (3291)

From: RFC Errata System <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2012 21:50:24 -0700 (PDT)

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC4960,
"Stream Control Transmission Protocol".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4960&eid=3291

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Eric W. Biederman <[email-masked]>

Section: 3.3.2

Original Text
-------------
          Variable Parameters                  Status     Type Value
          -------------------------------------------------------------
          IPv4 Address (Note 1)               Optional    5 IPv6 Address
          (Note 1)               Optional    6 Cookie Preservative
          Optional    9 Reserved for ECN Capable (Note 2)   Optional
          32768 (0x8000) Host Name Address (Note 3)          Optional
          11 Supported Address Types (Note 4)    Optional    12

Corrected Text
--------------
          Variable Parameters                  Status     Type Value
          -------------------------------------------------------------
          IPv4 Address (Note 1)               Optional    5 
          IPv6 Address (Note 1)               Optional    6
          Cookie Preservative                 Optional    9
          Reserved for ECN Capable (Note 2)   Optional    32768 (0x8000)
          Host Name Address (Note 3)          Optional    11
          Supported Address Types (Note 4)    Optional    12

Notes
-----
Something placed the line ending in the wrong place making the table nearly
unreadable.

Instructions:
-------------
This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC4960 (draft-ietf-tsvwg-2960bis-05)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Stream Control Transmission Protocol
Publication Date    : September 2007
Author(s)           : R. Stewart, Ed.
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Transport Area Working Group
Area                : Transport
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

---

From: Randy Stewart <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 07:18:01 -0400

If that is how the text looks, Eric is absolutely right. The text
should look like the "corrected" version. If you note the two
versions the actual text is *not* changed, just the formatting..

Hmm I wonder how we missed that ;-0

R

> "Stream Control Transmission Protocol".

-----
Randall Stewart
[email-masked]

---

From: Michael Tuexen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 13:49:01 +0200

> Hmm I wonder how we missed that ;-0
Jeff Morris sent a while ago a list of issues including this one:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tsvwg/current/msg09946.html

Best regards
Michael

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 09:18:47 +0100

Ok - so what dpi you people wish to happen?

- Is this a list of NiTS to be recorded and fixed in future RFCs?
- Is it important enough to be correction published in the Errata?

(it looks more like the first, but I'd be happy to take advice)

Gorry

P.S section 1.6, fourth paragraph issue": "2*32" should be "2**32"" could
be with noting for readers, but is probably obvious from the earlier text?

---

From: Michael Tuexen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 11:29:48 +0200

> - Is this a list of NiTS to be recorded and fixed in future RFCs?
This is at least what I thought. It should be addressed when we
start moving RFC 4960 to DS, which requires updating it.
> (it looks more like the first, but I'd be happy to take advice)
Agreed.

Best regards
Michael