On 2015-05-10 06:51, Sean Turner wrote: > On Apr 23, 2015, at 21:50, Richard Hansen <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 2015-04-21 18:49, Sean Turner wrote: >>> so I'd probably just leave it. >> >> Are you saying that the errata process is too heavyweight for a >> minor editorial typo like this? If so, is there a more appropriate >> way to report an editorial typo so that it will be fixed in a bis >> if/when one is ever produced? > > Sorry definitely wasn't clear there - errata is the right way to > handle this. I jumped to how I’d mark it if I were AD :) There’s > three ways: approved, rejected, and HDFU (hold for document update).
Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for the clarification -- I'm still new to IETF procedures, so this helps. > I was opting for HFDU. The meaning of HFDU wasn't clear to me until I found [1]. I agree with you -- HFDU does seem like the right choice here. [1] https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/errata-processing.html Thank you for your feedback, Richard _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
