IPP Mail Archive: IPP> FW: Errata in RFC 2911: "Interne

IPP Mail Archive: IPP> FW: Errata in RFC 2911: "Interne

IPP> FW: Errata in RFC 2911: "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model an d Semantics"

From: Hastings, Tom N (hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Date: Wed Sep 18 2002 - 15:12:17 EDT

  • Next message: Hastings, Tom N: "IPP> RE: [printing-cap] Capabilities API: Device Object [How about a M edia Object]"

    This very minor RFC 2911 Errata has been posted finally.

    To see any RFC Errata, go to:
    http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html

    Then bug on the RFC Errata box.

    They are sorted in reverse order by RFC number.

    If you've looked before, make sure you tell your Browser to refresh or you
    won't find the latest Errata.

    Tom

    -----Original Message-----
    From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org [mailto:rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org]
    Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 10:13
    To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org; hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com
    Cc: hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com; carl@manros.com
    Subject: Re: FW: IPP> Errata in RFC 2911: "Internet Printing
    Protocol/1.1: Mod el and Semantics"

    Tom,

    We apologize for the delay. We have updated our errata page to refelct
    the errors indicated below.

    Thank you.

    RFC Editor

    > From: "Hastings, Tom N" <hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com>
    > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
    > Cc: "Hastings, Tom" <hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com>, "Manros, Carl-Uno"
    <carl@manros.com>
    > Subject: FW: IPP> Errata in RFC 2911: "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Mod
    el
    and Semantics"
    > Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 13:32:16 -0700
    > MIME-Version: 1.0
    >
    > I submitted this Errata in July. It hasn't been posted yet. Is there
    > anything more that I have to do? Does it have to be approved by anyone,
    > such as our AD?
    >
    > Its not critical, though a recent I-D that is going through last call is
    > assuming that the errata is true and accepted, so it would be good to post
    > the errata.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Tom
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Hastings, Tom N [mailto:hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com]
    > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 17:52
    > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
    > Cc: ipp@pwg.org
    > Subject: IPP> Errata in RFC 2911: "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model
    > and Se mantics"
    >
    >
    > This note points out two errata in RFC 2911 regarding the ranges of status
    > codes.
    >
    > Section 13, which is "APPENDIX B: Status Codes and Suggested Status Code
    > Messages" has:
    >
    > "redirection" - 0x0200 to 0x02FF
    >
    > which should be:
    >
    > "redirection" - 0x0300 to 0x03FF
    >
    > and has:
    >
    > The top half (128 values) of each range (0x0n40 to 0x0nFF, for n = 0
    > to 5) is reserved for vendor use within each status code class.
    >
    > which should be:
    >
    > The top half (128 values) of each range (0x0n80 to 0x0nFF, for n = 0
    > to 5) is reserved for vendor use within each status code class.
    >
    > Thank you,
    >
    > Tom Hastings
    > IPP WG Editor



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Sep 18 2002 - 15:13:34 EDT