Authors and AD*, *AD, please see #1 below.
Authors, while reviewing this cluster of documents*, please reply to the questions below regarding consistency across the cluster. These questions are in addition to the document-specific questions sent for each RFC-to-be. Your reply will likely impact two or more of the documents in the cluster, so please discuss off-list as necessary, and then let us know how to proceed. Note - You have the option of updating the edited XML files yourself, if you prefer. We will wait to hear from you before continuing with the publication process. * Cluster 541 (C541) currently in AUTH48 state: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9892.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9893.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9895.html (In addition, the .pdf, .txt, .xml, and diff files are available.) You may track the progress of all documents in this cluster through AUTH48 at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/C541 1) *AD - We are sorry to hear of the passing of David Wiggins and Stan Ratliff. David is listed as an author for RFCs-to-be 9892, 9893, 9894, and 9895 (all documents in the cluster). Stan is listed as an author for RFC-to-be 9893. As AD, please confirm that you will approve the documents on behalf of David and Stan. (Note: Any of the three options at https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/#missingauthor are acceptable.) 2) FYI - We updated "DiffServ" to "Diffserv" throughout the cluster per https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=terms. If no objections, we will ask IANA to update the following descriptions prior to publication. Link to registry group: https://www.iana.org/assignments/dlep-parameters "Traffic Classification Sub-Data Item Type Values" registry (draft-ietf-manet-dlep-traffic-classification): OLD: DiffServ Traffic Classification NEW: Diffserv Traffic Classification "Extension Type Values" registry (draft-ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension): OLD: DiffServ Aware Credit Window NEW: Diffserv Aware Credit Window 3) We see "Credit window control" (beginning of sentence, so the "C" is capitalized) but "credit-window scheme". We suggest updating to "credit window scheme" (no hyphen). 4) Do "credit window control" (approx. 24 instances in cluster) and "credit window flow control" (3 instances in cluster) mean the same thing? Will the interchangeable usage of these terms - or the distinction between the two - be clear to readers? 5) We see both "Type Value" and "Type value" in running text. Which form is preferred? Some examples: "Message Type value" in draft-ietf-manet-dlep-credit-flow-control "DLEP Extension Type Value" in draft-ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension and draft-ietf-manet-dlep-ether-credit-extension "DiffServ Aware Credit Window Type Value" in draft-ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension "IEEE 802.1Q Aware Credit Window Type Value" in draft-ietf-manet-dlep-ether-credit-extension 6) 'Rick Taylor's "Data Item Containers"' is only mentioned in the Acknowledgments sections of two of the four documents in this group (draft-ietf-manet-dlep-traffic-classification and draft-ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension). Would you like to add the applicable sentence to the Acknowledgments sections of draft-ietf-manet-dlep-credit-flow-control and draft-ietf-manet-dlep-ether-credit-extension as well? Thank you, Lynne Bartholomew and Rebecca VanRheenen RFC Production Center -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
