Brian,
On Dec 2, 2010, at 2:33 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
There is no way this is an erratum. There was a clear choice in the WG
to standardise on lower case.
I agree. This was a deliberate decision by the 6man working group, it is not
an error.
There could be no objection to a
I concur with support for the decision in RFC 5952 to establish a
canonical format for IPv6 addresses. The choice of lower-case was
deliberate and subject to review and consensus within the working group,
and should not be construed as an erratum. Opinions and
implementations may vary.
I should have said that I supported the clarification/revision to
canonical format in RFC 5952, as it was discussed and accepted by the
working group. I accept that you are proposing revising RFC 5952 to
allow both upper and lower case, but feel that an errata report is not
sufficient to do
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 11:33:04AM +1300, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
There is no way this is an erratum. There was a clear choice in the WG
to standardise on lower case.
[...]
In any case I would object to this erratum being accepted.
I agree that the errata should be rejected - erratas are
