Re: Repeat request for help with Erratum on RFC 5384

Yes, I read through this, and I think they are correct.
I do agree with Stig about getting author by-in, though.

Marshall

On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Stig Venaas <stig <at> venaas.com> wrote:
> On 03.05.2012 08:53, Adrian Farrel wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Back in November, I asked...
>>
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pim/current/msg02332.html
>>
>> I can't find any responses.
>>
>> This is a brief extra call for help before I agree the Erratum
>> (http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=1597)
>
>
> The erratum makes sense to me at least. I wish the authors of
> the RFC could speak up if they disagree, but it seems clear to me.
>
> Stig
>
>
>> A
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> pim mailing list