We have noted your approval on the AUTH48 page for this document (https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9845). We will move this document forward in the publication process.
Thank you for your time. Alice Russo RFC Production Center > On Sep 29, 2025, at 2:33 PM, Jérôme FRANCOIS <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear all, > > I reviewed the changes made over the different revision. > Thanks for these careful changes. I approve it from my side as well. > > Best regards > Jérôme > > > > > Le 17/09/2025 à 19:24, Alexander Clemm a écrit : >> ⚠ Sender external to the University's network. See the security guidelines >> at iso.uni.lu. >> >> Hello Alice, >> >> thank you very much! I have reviewed the changes; this looks great. Many >> thanks for all your support! >> >> With this, I approve as well. >> >> Kind regards >> --- Alex >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Alice Russo <[email protected]> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2025 8:07 AM >> To: Cedric Westphal <[email protected]>; Alexander Clemm <[email protected]> >> Cc: Jérôme François <[email protected]>; Laurent Ciavaglia (Nokia) >> <[email protected]>; Alexander Clemm <[email protected]>; >> [email protected]; Jeff Tantsura <[email protected]>; Marie-Paule >> Odini <[email protected]>; IRSG <[email protected]>; auth48archive >> <[email protected]>; RFC Editor <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9845 <draft-irtf-nmrg-green-ps-06> for your >> review >> >> Cedric, Alex, >> >> Thank you for your replies. We have updated the document as requested, with >> two changes to the text provided for Section 1.1: removed extraneous >> parenthesis in 'atmosphere)'; changed 'but by also reducing' to 'but also by >> reducing'. >> >> This diff file shows only the changes since the last posted version: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845-lastrfcdiff.html >> >> >> The revised files are here (please refresh): >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845.html >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845.txt >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845.pdf >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845.xml >> >> This diff file shows all changes from the approved I-D: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845-diff.html >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >> >> This diff file shows the changes made during AUTH48 thus far: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845-auth48diff.html >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by >> side) >> >> Cedric wrote: >>> I approve as well! >> Your approval has been recorded. >> >> We will wait to hear from Alex again and from Jeff, Marie-Paule, and Jérôme >> before continuing the publication process. This page shows the AUTH48 status >> of your document: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9845 >> >> Thank you. >> RFC Editor/ar >> >>> On Sep 15, 2025, at 11:58 AM, Alexander Clemm <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Dear Alice, >>> >>> I have returned from my trip. Thank you so much for your support in >>> driving this forward, and to Carlos for jumping in during my absence! >>> >>> I have the following small comments outstanding: >>> >>> (1) Could you please record my affiliation as "Sympotech"? (Address, email >>> etc staying the same, just s/Independent/Sympotech/). Thank you! >>> >>> >>> (2) Current: >>> >>> Therefore, the networking industry has an important role to play in >>> meeting sustainability goals and not just by enabling others to >>> reduce their reliance on energy but by also reducing its own. >>> >>> I find the "and" that was added a bit awkward; why not make it a comma >>> which more clearly separates the two aspekts (not just one, but als the >>> other) to result in: >>> >>> Suggested: >>> >>> Therefore, the networking industry has an important role to play in >>> meeting sustainability goals, not just by enabling others to >>> reduce their reliance on energy but by also reducing its own. >>> >>> (3) Section 6.1. We got rid of "right-placing", replacing it with >>> "correctly place". "Correct" is not the proper term here; you can place >>> functions in ways that are correct but that are at the same time >>> inefficient and suboptimal. I think "correct" needs to be replaced with >>> "smart" here. i.e.: >>> >>> Current: >>> Likewise, there are opportunities to correctly place functionality in >>> the network for optimal effectiveness. >>> >>> Suggested: >>> >>> Likewise, there are opportunities to smartly place functionality in >>> the network for optimal effectiveness. >>> >>> (4) After the text changes, I think the 2nd paragraph in the motivation now >>> sounds a bit awkward and redundant (not wrong, but can be stylistically >>> improved; also this is at the very beginning of the document where we >>> should perhaps word things not quite as lengthily and should come to the >>> point). I liked the original version better. This will not be worth >>> holding the document up over, but I am wondering if we could still apply >>> some wordsmithing, perhaps: >>> >>> (If that throws in too much a wrench, please let me know in which case >>> I will withdraw my comment as it is not worth holding the document up >>> over) >>> >>> Current: >>> The science behind greenhouse gas emissions and their relationship >>> with climate change is complex. However, there is overwhelming >>> scientific consensus pointing toward a clear correlation between >>> climate change and a rising amount of greenhouse gases in the >>> atmosphere. When we say 'greenhouse gases' or GHG, we are referring >>> to gases in the Earth's atmosphere that trap heat and contribute to >>> the greenhouse effect. They include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane >>> (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases (as covered under >>> the Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement). In terms of emissions from >>> human activity, the dominant greenhouse gas is CO2; consequently, it >>> often becomes shorthand for "all GHGs". However, other gases are >>> also converted into "CO2-equivalents", or CO2e. One greenhouse gas >>> of particular concern, but by no means the only one, is carbon >>> dioxide (CO2). Carbon dioxide is emitted in the process of burning >>> fuels to generate energy that is used, for example, to power >>> electrical devices such as networking equipment. Notable here is the >>> use of fossil fuels (such as oil, which releases CO2 that had long >>> been removed from the earth's atmosphere), as opposed to the use of >>> renewable or sustainable fuels that do not "add" to the amount of CO2 >>> in the atmosphere. There are additional gases associated with >>> electricity generation, in particular methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide >>> (N2O). Although they exist in smaller quantities, they have an even >>> higher Global Warming Potential (GWP). >>> >>> Suggested: >>> >>> The science behind greenhouse gas emissions and their relationship >>> with climate change is complex. However, there is overwhelming >>> scientific consensus pointing toward a clear correlation between >>> climate change and a rising amount of greenhouse gases in the >>> atmosphere. When we say 'greenhouse gases' or GHG, we are referring >>> to gases in the Earth's atmosphere that trap heat and contribute to >>> the greenhouse effect. They include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane >>> (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases (as covered under >>> the Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement). >>> In terms of emissions from >>> human activity, the dominant greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide (CO2). >>> CO2 is emitted in the process of burning >>> fuels to generate energy that is used, for example, to power >>> electrical devices such as networking equipment. Those fuels often >>> include fossil fuels (such as oil), which releases >>> CO2 that had long >>> been removed from the earth's atmosphere), as opposed to the use of >>> renewable or sustainable fuels that do not "add" to the amount of CO2 >>> in the atmosphere. >>> Other GHGs such as CH4 and N2O are associated with electricity generation >>> as well. >>> Although they are emitted in smaller quantities, they have an even >>> higher Global Warming Potential (GWP). To facilitate accounting for >>> them, they are collectively simply converted into CO2 equivalents (CO2e). >>> >>> Thanks >>> --- Alex >>> On Sep 15, 2025, at 11:02 AM, Cedric Westphal <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Actually, I looked at the whole draft and not just the substance of >>> the text, and please update my affiliation as: >>> Cedric Westphal, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, >>> University of California, Santa Cruz. >>> The email can be updated to [email protected] but the ieee email is fine. >>> That's my only request. >>> Best, >>> >>> C. >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 11:00 AM Cedric Westphal <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> I approve as well! >>>> >>>> C. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 12:53 AM Laurent Ciavaglia (Nokia) >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Dear Alice, dear all, >>>>> >>>>> I have reviewed the changes made over the AUTH48 process/period, and >>>>> found them to address very well the identified issues, to improve the >>>>> text and formulation overall and to not change the iniital meaning of the >>>>> sentences/paragraphs. >>>>> Overall this is a very good work on the document for publication >>>>> readiness. Thank you Alice, RFC Editor team and co-authors for the >>>>> improvements. >>>>> >>>>> Also, I hereby communicate my approval this RFC for publication. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you, best regards, Laurent >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Alice Russo <[email protected]> >>>>> Sent: Saturday, 6 September, 2025 10:31 PM >>>>> Cc: Alexander Clemm <[email protected]>; Alexander Clemm >>>>> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Laurent Ciavaglia (Nokia) >>>>> <[email protected]>; Jeff Tantsura >>>>> <[email protected]>; Marie-Paule Odini <[email protected]>; >>>>> IRSG <[email protected]>; Jérôme François <[email protected]>; >>>>> auth48archive <[email protected]>; RFC Editor >>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>> Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9845 <draft-irtf-nmrg-green-ps-06> >>>>> for your review >>>>> >>>>> [You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn >>>>> why this is important at >>>>> https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] >>>>> >>>>> CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking >>>>> links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional >>>>> information. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Carlos, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for your reply. The revised files are here (please refresh): >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845.html >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845.txt >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845.pdf >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845.xml >>>>> >>>>> This diff file shows all changes from the approved I-D: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845-diff.html >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845-rfcdiff.html (side by >>>>> side) >>>>> >>>>> This diff file shows the changes made during AUTH48 thus far: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845-auth48diff.html >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845-auth48rfcdiff.html (side >>>>> by side) >>>>> >>>>> This diff file shows only the changes since the last posted version: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9845-lastrfcdiff.html >>>>> >>>>> In addition to the changes you requested: >>>>> - removed extraneous 'to'. >>>>> - lowercased 'fluorinated'. >>>>> - replaced angled quotes with straight quotes per RFC style. >>>>> >>>>> Re: >>>>>> After fixing these three nits, please note and write down my >>>>>> Approval of the document at >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9845 >>>>> Your approval has been recorded. We await word from your coauthors and >>>>> the Document Shepherd before continuing the publication process. >>>>> >>>>> Alice Russo >>>>> RFC Production Center > > -- > Jérôme FRANCOIS > Research Scientist > SEDAN - SnT / University of Luxembourg > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
