Subject: RFC 3165 errata

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:07:04 +0200

The definition of smLaunchRunIndexNext on page 33 uses the following
SYNTAX clause:

       SYNTAX      Integer32 (1..2147483647)

This range is inconsistent with the text in the DESCRIPTION clause,
which in some cases requires to return 0 as a special value. Hence,
the SYNTAX clause should be:

       SYNTAX      Integer32 (0..2147483647)

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder      Technical University Braunschweig
<[email-masked]>  Dept. Operating Systems & Computer Networks
Phone: +49 531 391 3289    Muehlenpfordtstr. 23, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany
Fax:   +49 531 391 5936    <URL:http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/~schoenw/>

---

From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 22:19:05 +0200

Randy writes/asks:
> 
> Randy> Ugh.  Does it make sense to do an i-d with the correction and
> Randy> re-submit as soon as possible, or should we wait and treat this
> Randy> as an "editorial" fix when it's time to consider advancing the
> Randy> specification to Draft Standard?
> 
I would think we can do so with the nex revision of the document.
There are more RFCs with bug fix on RFC Editor errata page.

Bert