Re: Repeat request for help with Erratum on RFC 5384
Marshall Eubanks <marshall.eubanks <at> gmail.com>
2012-05-04 18:01:12 GMT
Yes, I read through this, and I think they are correct.
I do agree with Stig about getting author by-in, though.
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:
>> Back in November, I asked...
>> I can't find any responses.
>> This is a brief extra call for help before I agree the Erratum
> 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.
>> pim mailing list