The document looks good to publish. Thanks
Joe On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 8:13 AM Madison Church <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Sean and Joe, > > This is a friendly reminder that we await your approvals for the > formatting of this document. For formatting changes, we have updated > relevant URLs to be clickable in the HTML and PDF outputs. In addition to > formatting, we have updated the date and added a couple of missing periods > in a few unordered lists throughout the document (see Sections 4 and 6: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-lastdiff.html). > > Please review the XML file and its TXT, HTML, and PDF outputs, and let us > know if any changes are required or if you approve the RFC for publication. > While this is your approval of the XML and its outputs, we consider this > your final assent that the document is ready for publication. To request > changes or approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email. > Please use ‘REPLY ALL’, as all the parties CCed on this message need to see > your approval. > > Note that we will only make changes in the XML file from this point on. > > XML file: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.xml > > Output files: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.txt > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.pdf > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html > > Lastdiff of the text (shows latest changes): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-lastdiff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-lastrfcdiff.html (side by > side) > > Comprehensive 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) > > For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847 > > Thank you! > Madison Church > RFC Production Center > > > On Dec 4, 2025, at 4:15 PM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I pulled the md file so I can more easily make the repo match final > product. > > > > spt > > > >> On Dec 4, 2025, at 15:05, Madison Church <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Joe and Sean, > >> > >> We have converted the kramdown-rfc file to RFCXML. For formatting > changes, we have updated relevant URLs to be clickable in the HTML and PDF > outputs. In addition to formatting, we have updated the date and added a > couple of missing periods in a few unordered lists throughout the document > (see Sections 4 and 6: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-lastdiff.html). > >> > >> Please review the XML file and its TXT, HTML, and PDF outputs, and let > us know if any changes are required or if you approve the RFC for > publication. While this is your approval of the XML and its outputs, we > consider this your final assent that the document is ready for publication. > To request changes or approve your RFC for publication, please reply to > this email. Please use ‘REPLY ALL’, as all the parties CCed on this message > need to see your approval. > >> > >> Note that we will only make changes in the XML file from this point on. > >> > >> XML file: > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.xml > >> > >> Output files: > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.txt > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.pdf > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html > >> > >> Lastdiff of the text (shows latest changes): > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-lastdiff.html > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-lastrfcdiff.html (side by > side) > >> > >> Comprehensive 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) > >> > >> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847 > >> > >> Thank you! > >> Madison Church > >> RFC Production Center > >> > >>> On Dec 4, 2025, at 1:56 PM, Madison Church < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Joe, > >>> > >>> Thank you for your reply! We have marked your approval for the > contents of this document (see: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847 > ). > >>> > >>> We will now move on to the second part of the kramdown-rfc AUTH48 > process, which will be sent in a separate email shortly. > >>> > >>> Thank you! > >>> > >>> Madison Church > >>> RFC Production Center > >>> > >>>> On Dec 3, 2025, at 4:17 PM, Joseph Salowey <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Thank you Madison. I approve of the document's content. > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> > >>>> Joe > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2025 at 6:54 AM Madison Church < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>>> Hi Sean, > >>>> > >>>> Thank you for your reply! We have marked your approval for the > document’s content (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847). Once > we receive Joe’s approval for the content of the document, we will convert > the document to XML to make any remaining formatting updates and ask for > formatting approvals at that time. > >>>> > >>>> Thank you! > >>>> > >>>> Madison Church > >>>> RFC Production Center > >>>> > >>>>> On Dec 1, 2025, at 8:28 AM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Nov 26, 2025, at 14:32, Madison Church < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Sean, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thank you for your reply! Please see inline. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Nov 26, 2025, at 10:55 AM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Madison, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi! Question about formatting: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I see that the asides were converted to quotes: > >>>>>>> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html#name-recommended-note > >>>>>>> and > >>>>>>> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html#name-tls-exporter-labels-registr > >>>>>>> In other RFCs they stayed as asides: > >>>>>>> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9881.html#name-ml-dsa-public-keys-in-pkix > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Why are they different? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thank you for asking. We use {:quote} instead of {:aside} for notes > that appear in an IANA registry because the document is quoting the IANA > registry. We do not believe these fit the description of {:aside} (<aside> > in XML), which is defined as “a container for content that is semantically > less important or tangential to the content that surrounds it". > >>>>> > >>>>> Okay well that makes total sense ;) > >>>>> > >>>>>>> One other formatting thing: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> In s7: s/{{RFC8447, Section 17}}/{{Section 17 of RFC8447}} > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We have updated as requested! See updated files below. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.txt > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.pdf > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.xml > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.md > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-diff.html > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-rfcdiff.html (side by > side) > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-auth48diff.html > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-auth48rfcdiff.html > (side by side) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Markdown diffs: > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-diff.html > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-rfcdiff.html (side > by side) > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-auth48diff.html > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-auth48rfcdiff.html > (side by side) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, see: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We will await content approvals from each author prior to moving > forward with formatting updates. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> For details of the AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc (including the > two-part approval process), see > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. > >>>>> > >>>>> I approve the formatting for this I-D. > >>>>> > >>>>> I also approve the contents for this I-D. > >>>>> > >>>>> spt > >>>>> > >>>>>> Thank you! > >>>>>> Madison Church > >>>>>> RFC Production Center > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> spt > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Nov 25, 2025, at 11:06, Madison Church < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Authors, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> This is a friendly reminder that we have yet to hear back from > you regarding this document’s readiness for publication. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Note that we have made additional updates to the IANA > Considerations section based on a note that we received from IANA. Please > review: > >>>>>>>>> The actions have all been completed, but the last three > paragraphs of Section 18 (the IANA Considerations section) need to be > removed. The authors decided to stop sending requesters to the mailing list > they’re referring to in that section and instead send them directly to > IANA. (In fact, Rich is talking about shutting that > [email protected] list down entirely, which is what drew my > attention to this.) The note that’s been pasted into that section is > actually an old note that we removed from the registry as we were > performing the actions.Our understanding is that the section should just > read, “This document is entirely about changes to TLS-related IANA > registries.” > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.txt > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.pdf > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.xml > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.md > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-diff.html > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-rfcdiff.html (side by > side) > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-auth48diff.html > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-auth48rfcdiff.html > (side by side) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Markdown diffs: > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-diff.html > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-rfcdiff.html (side > by side) > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-auth48diff.html > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-auth48rfcdiff.html > (side by side) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, see: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Please review the contents of the document carefully. Contact us > with any further updates or with your approval of the document’s contents > in its current form. We will await approvals from each author prior to > moving forward with formatting updates. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> For details of the AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc (including the > two-part approval process), see > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thank you! > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Madison Church > >>>>>>>> RFC Production Center > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Nov 17, 2025, at 2:39 PM, Madison Church < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi Joe, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Thank you for your reply! We have updated the document > accordingly and have no further questions related to content at this time. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Please review the contents of the document carefully. Contact us > with any further updates or with your approval of the document’s contents > in its current form. We will await approvals from each author prior to > moving forward with formatting updates. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> For details of the AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc (including the > two-part approval process), see > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.txt > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.pdf > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.xml > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.md > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-diff.html > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-rfcdiff.html (side > by side) > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-auth48diff.html > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-auth48rfcdiff.html > (side by side) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Markdown diffs: > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-diff.html > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-rfcdiff.html > (side by side) > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-auth48diff.html > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-auth48rfcdiff.html > (side by side) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: > >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Thank you! > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Madison Church > >>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Nov 15, 2025, at 8:20 PM, Joseph Salowey <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Attached is an updated markdown file, did we have this in a > github repo as well? Might be easier to make comments and suggest changes > through PRs. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I only made one substantive change to update my Organization > from Venafi to CyberArk. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I also ran fix-lint to remove some of the trailing whitespace > so I can build it. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I also modified the text in comment 5 to apply the "Singular" > option which is what I think is the best. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I didn't find any issues with inclusive language. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Joe > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 4:53 PM Joseph Salowey <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of document review. Questions answered > below. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Joe > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 4:19 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 > >>>>>>>>>> --> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> [Joe] This looks good to me > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 2) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that > appear in the title) > >>>>>>>>>> for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. --> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> [Joe]I don't think there are additional keywords > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>>>>>>> --> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> [Joe] OK > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 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. > >>>>>>>>>> --> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> [Joe] The offending sentence no longer appears in the document > since the IANA action has already been completed. > >>>>>>>>>> The registry has be updated with the correct name since TLS > 1.3. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 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. > >>>>>>>>>> --> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> [Joe] I don't think it changes the intent of the section. I > have a slight preference for the Singular, but either will do. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 6) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have reordered the values in Table 1 > to reflect > >>>>>>>>>> how they are listed in the "TLS ExtensionType Values" registry. > >>>>>>>>>> --> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> [Joe] Thank you > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 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. > >>>>>>>>>> --> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> [Joe] Yes > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 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. > >>>>>>>>>> --> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> [Joe] This looks good to me > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 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) > >>>>>>>>>> --> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> [Joe] I believe this is correct. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>>>>>>> --> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> [Joe] This looks good, Thank you > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 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. > >>>>>>>>>> --> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> [Joe] OK will review. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> <rfc9847.md> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > >
-- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
