On Jun 12, 2013, at 10:00 AM, Acee Lindem <[email protected]> wrote: > I think one problem with the errata process is that the you have to be an AD > in order to validate or reject them. The WG chairs should also have the > authority to summarily reject errata - especially the nuisance errata that > are being submitted these days.
That sounds great in theory, but I think it would be difficult to write the code that decided which working group chairs got to modify which errata. We recently got a typo erratum on RFC 917.
