Hi Tim, all,
> On 22 Aug 2022, at 10:29, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote:
>
> Hi Warren, all,
>
> I (co-author) agree that this was an oversight. I have no objections to the
> change.
>
> However.. I haven't checked, but beware that current implementations might
> fail to parse the file if a
Hi Tim,
On 08/22, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote:
> Hi Warren, all,
>
> I (co-author) agree that this was an oversight. I have no objections to the
> change.
>
> However.. I haven't checked, but beware that current implementations
> might fail to parse the file if a "comment" member is added here, if
>
Hi Warren, all,
I (co-author) agree that this was an oversight. I have no objections to the
change.
However.. I haven't checked, but beware that current implementations might fail
to parse the file if a "comment" member is added here, if they are (overly)
strict. I expect that most will
Dear SIDROPS, at al,
I believe that this Errata is correct, and I intends to mark it Verified
unless I hear a clear objection by this Friday (August 26th).
W
On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 5:25 PM, Ben Maddison <
benm=40workonline.afr...@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> Adding sidrops@
>
> On 08/10, RFC
Adding sidrops@
On 08/10, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8416,
> "Simplified Local Internet Number Resource Management with the RPKI (SLURM)".
>
> --
> You may review the report below and at:
>
