Hi Jürgen, 

Thank you for pointing out that sentence in the Introduction. Your suggestion 
is a good one; I made the update (see files below). I also checked the YANG 
modules using pyang with the --ietf flag, and they are still valid. Note that 
these will also be double-checked by the RPC team immediately before 
publication.

We have noted your approval on the AUTH48 status page for this document (see 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9911). We now consider AUTH48 to be 
complete and will begin to prepare this document for publication. Thank you for 
your attention and guidance during the AUTH48 process!

--FILES (please refresh)--

Updated XML file:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9911.xml

Updated output files:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9911.txt
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9911.pdf
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9911.html

Diff files showing only the last round of AUTH48 changes:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9911-lastdiff.html
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9911-lastrfcdiff.html (side by side)

Diff files showing all changes made during AUTH48:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9911-auth48diff.html
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9911-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by side)

Diff files showing all changes:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9911-diff.html
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9911-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9911-alt-diff.html (diff showing changes 
where text is moved or deleted)

For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9911

Thank you,

Rebecca VanRheenen
RFC Production Center



> On Dec 17, 2025, at 4:50 AM, Jürgen Schönwälder 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 02:30:24PM -0800, Rebecca VanRheenen wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Jürgen,
>> 
>> Thank you for the reply. We have updated the document accordingly.
>> 
>> All of our questions have now been addressed. Please review the document and 
>> let us know if any further changes are needed or if you approve the document 
>> in its current form.
>> 
> 
> Hi Rebecca,
> 
> this looks all good, I went through all the diffs once more. Just a
> minor question (from a non-native speaker): The introduction now
> reads:
> 
> *  The "ietf-inet-types" module defines data types relevant for the
>   Internet Protocol suite such as types related to IP address, types
>   for domain name, host name, URI, and email, and types for values
>   in common protocol fields (e.g., port numbers).
> 
> Is it really 'IP address' or should it be "IP addresses' since there
> are different kinds of IP addresses? For me, the singular 'IP address'
> reads a bit strange but I leave it to your judgement.
> 
> Do you double check that the YANG is still valid? I have not verified
> this using tools myself.
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Jürgen Schönwälder              Constructor University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany

-- 
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to