Thanks! spt
> On Dec 16, 2025, at 16:20, Madison Church <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Sean and Joe, > > Thank you both for your replies (and apologies for the delayed reply on my > end)! We have noted both of your approvals here: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847. > > We will now send our updates along to IANA. > > Thank you! > > Madison Church > RFC Production Center > >> On Dec 16, 2025, at 3:02 PM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> And these last changes look good to me too! >> >> spt >> >>> On Dec 11, 2025, at 11:13, 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]
