Just checking, but I’m not sure Joe’s approvals have been noted: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847
spt > On Dec 12, 2025, at 12:31, Joseph Salowey <[email protected]> wrote: > > The document looks good to publish. > > Thanks > > Joe > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 8:13 AM Madison Church <[email protected] > <mailto:[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] >> > <mailto:[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] >> >> <mailto:[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] >> >>> <mailto:[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] >> >>>> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] >> >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> On Nov 26, 2025, at 14:32, Madison Church >> >>>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[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] >> >>>>>>> <mailto:[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] >> >>>>>>>> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] >> >>>>>>>>> <mailto:[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] >> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[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] >> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[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] >> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[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] >> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Current: >> >>>>>>>>>> | Note: Requests for registration in the "Specification Required" >> >>>>>>>>>> | [RFC8126] range should be sent to [email protected] >> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[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] >> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[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> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> > >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
-- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
