Hi! I did start an email. Hope to get through it today. spt
> On Nov 6, 2025, at 08:48, Madison Church <[email protected]> wrote: > > Greetings, > > This is a friendly weekly reminder that this document awaits your attention. > Please review the document-specific questions and AUTH48 announcement. Let us > know if we can be of assistance as you begin the AUTH48 review process. > > The AUTH48 status page of this document is viewable at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847 > > The AUTH48 FAQs are available at: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/#auth48 > > We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience. > > Thank you, and happy IETF week! > > Madison Church > RFC Production Center > >> On Oct 30, 2025, at 7:19 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> >> Authors, >> >> While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary) >> the following questions, which are also in the source file. >> >> 1) <!-- [rfced] Note that we have updated the short title, which appears in >> the >> running header in the PDF output, as follows. Please let us know any >> objections. >> >> Original: >> (D)TLS IANA Registry Updates >> >> Current: >> TLS and DTLS IANA Registry Updates >> --> >> >> >> 2) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear in the >> title) >> for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. --> >> >> >> 3) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We will do the following when we convert the file to >> RFCXML: >> >> - Update relevant URLs to be clickable in the HTML and PDF outputs >> --> >> >> >> 4) <!-- [rfced] Because this document updates RFC 8447, please >> review the errata reported for RFC 8447 >> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/rfc8447) >> and let us know if you confirm our opinion that none of them >> are relevant to the content of this document. >> --> >> >> >> 5) <!-- [rfced] In the sentence below, is the intention to have consensus >> to leave one item or multiple items marked? >> >> Original: >> The IETF might have consensus to leave an items marked as "N" on the >> basis of its having limited applicability or usage constraints. >> >> Perhaps (Singular): >> The IETF might have consensus to leave an item marked as "N" on the >> basis of the item having limited applicability or usage constraints. >> >> Or (Plural): >> The IETF might have consensus to leave items marked as "N" on the >> basis of the items having limited applicability or usage constraints. >> --> >> >> >> 6) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have reordered the values in Table 1 to reflect >> how they are listed in the "TLS ExtensionType Values" registry. >> --> >> >> >> 7) <!--[rfced] May we remove this sentence from the end of Section 14? >> This action is already listed in Section 7. >> >> Original: >> IANA is requested to rename the "Note" column to "Comment" column in >> TLS Exporter Labels registry. >> --> >> >> >> 8) <!--[rfced] IANA provided the following note when they notified us that >> their >> actions were complete: >> >> NOTE: Some text at the end of the IANA Considerations section concerning >> request >> submission needs to be removed or replaced. Details at the end of the list of >> actions. >> >> Per this note and to reflect what appears in the TLS-related IANA registries, >> we have updated the text as shown below. Please let us know if any changes >> are >> needed. >> >> Original: >> Requests for assignments from the registry's Specification Required >> range should be sent to the mailing list described in [This RFC, >> Section 16]. If approved, designated experts should notify IANA >> within three weeks. For assistance, please contact [email protected]. >> >> Current: >> | Note: Requests for registration in the "Specification Required" >> | [RFC8126] range should be sent to [email protected] or submitted via >> | IANA's application form, per [RFC 9847]. IANA will forward the >> | request to the expert mailing list described in [RFC8447], >> | Section 17 and track its progress. See the registration procedure >> | table below for more information. >> --> >> >> >> 9) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have added an expansion for the following >> abbreviation >> per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide"). Please review each expansion >> in the document carefully to ensure correctness. >> >> International Data Encryption Algorithm (IDEA) >> --> >> >> >> 10) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have updated the following terms to the form on the >> right to match other documents in Cluster 430. Please let us know any >> objections. >> >> ciphersuite(s) > cipher suite(s) >> code points > codepoints >> --> >> >> >> 11) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of the online >> Style Guide <https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/#inclusive_language> >> and let us know if any changes are needed. Updates of this nature typically >> result in more precise language, which is helpful for readers. >> >> Note that our script did not flag any words in particular, but this should >> still be reviewed as a best practice. >> --> >> >> >> Thank you. >> Madison Church and Alanna Paloma >> RFC Production Center >> >> >> On Oct 30, 2025, at 4:18 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> >> *****IMPORTANT***** >> >> Updated 2025/10/30 >> >> RFC Author(s): >> >> Your document has now entered AUTH48. >> >> The document was edited in kramdown-rfc as part of the RPC pilot test (see >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc). >> >> Please review the procedures for AUTH48 using kramdown-rfc: >> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_instructions_completing_auth48_using_kramdown >> >> Once your document has completed AUTH48, it will be published as >> an RFC. >> >> >> Files >> ----- >> >> The files are available here: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.md >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.pdf >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.txt >> >> Diff file of the text: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-diff.html >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >> >> Diff of the kramdown: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-diff.html >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >> >> >> Tracking progress >> ----------------- >> >> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847 >> >> >> Please let us know if you have any questions. >> >> Thank you for your cooperation, >> >> RFC Editor >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC9847 (draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-15) >> >> Title : IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS >> Author(s) : J. Salowey, S. Turner >> WG Chair(s) : Joseph A. Salowey, Sean Turner, Deirdre Connolly >> >> Area Director(s) : Deb Cooley, Paul Wouters >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
-- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
