Brett Zamir wrote: > My errata was for RFC3921, at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3921.txt : IM > and Presence. As I mentioned, the draft copy has already corrected the > problem, but I just mentioned it in case you want to fix the non-draft > copies until the draft one is ready.
Ah, OK. :) I cannot "fix" RFC 3921 because the IETF doesn't edit documents in place like we do. They have an errata process, but it's cumbersome, and in any case we're way beyond that now with rfc3921bis (and rfc3920bis). If it's fixed in rfc3921bis, please be happy that someone before you reported it or I fixed it when I noticed the error. However, if you have the time to give both rfc3920bis and rfc3921bis a careful review, I would be most appreciative, because the way we'll move forward is to get those two specs done and approved by the IESG. I've read them so many times now that I miss errors in the text, so more eyeballs will help quite a bit. Thanks! Peter
