Hi Authors,

Rather than updating to the original suggestion below, we have simply shifted 
each line of sourcecode to the left by 2 spaces to retain the original format.

See updated files below:
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908.txt
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908.pdf
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908.html
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908.xml
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908-diff.html
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908-auth48diff.html
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by side)

Thank you!

Madison Church
RFC Production Center

> On Dec 19, 2025, at 10:05 AM, Madison Church <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Dan and Owen,
> 
> We have noted both approvals on the AUTH48 status page (see 
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9908).
> 
> For the line of sourcecode in Section 3.4, the warning pertains to the text 
> output, where the line is 74 characters (2 over the limit of 72 characters). 
> 
> txt (74 characters):
>                    EXTENSION.&ExtnType({ExtensionSet}{@extnID})) OPTIONAL
> 
> html (71 characters):
>                 EXTENSION.&ExtnType({ExtensionSet}{@extnID})) OPTIONAL
> 
> Thus, we have updated this line of sourcecode to our original suggestion 
> below:
>> EXTENSION.&ExtnType({ExtensionSet}{@extnID}))
>>                    OPTIONAL
> 
> The updated files have been posted here:
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908.txt
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908.pdf
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908.html
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908.xml
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908-diff.html
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908-rfcdiff.html
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908-auth48diff.html
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9908-auth48rfcdiff.html
> 
> Once we receive approval from David, we will move this document forward in 
> the publication process.
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> Madison Church
> RFC Production Center
> 
>> On Dec 18, 2025, at 5:03 PM, Dan Harkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>  Hi Madison,
>> 
>> On 12/17/25 1:31 PM, Madison Church wrote:
>>> Hi Michael,
>>> 
>>> Thank you for your reply! We have noted your approval on the AUTH48 status 
>>> page (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9908).
>>> 
>>> Please note that there are some followup questions that are still 
>>> outstanding. We have copied them below for convenience. Once we receive 
>>> approvals from Owen, David, and Dan, we will move this document forward in 
>>> the publication process.
>> 
>>  I agree with Michael on the changes.
>> 
>>>>> 1. <!-- \[rfced\] We note that the following lines exceed the 
>>>>> 72-character limit. Please let us know how the lines should be 
>>>>> broken/wrapped.
>>>>> 
>>>>> AUTHORS: section 3.4, seems hard to wrap sensibly.
>>>> 1) Would the following structure work?
>>>> 
>>>> Perhaps:
>>>> EXTENSION.&ExtnType({ExtensionSet}{@extnID}))
>>>>                    OPTIONAL
>> 
>>  For this, I don't see how that exceeds the 72-character limit. I looked at
>> the html page and it's significantly less than the text before and after it.
>> I see a note from rfced in the xml about wrapping but, again, I don't see
>> what's exceeding 72 characters.
>> 
>>>>> 1. <!--\[rfced\] Does Appendix A provide the ASN.1 module for the 
>>>>> Extension Request Template attribute? Or is it provided for the 
>>>>> Certification Request Information Template attribute only?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Original:
>>>>> This appendix provides an ASN.1 module \[X.680\] for the Certification
>>>>> Request Information Template attribute, and it follows the
>>>>> conventions established in \[RFC5911\], \[RFC5912\], and \[RFC6268\].
>>>>> 
>>>>> Perhaps:
>>>>> This appendix provides an ASN.1 module \[X.680\] for the Certification
>>>>> Request Information Template and Extension Request Template
>>>>> attributes, and it follows the conventions established in \[RFC5911\],
>>>>> \[RFC5912\], and \[RFC6268\].
>>>>> -->
>>>>> 
>>>>> AUTHORS: I think yes.  NOT QUITE SURE.
>>>> 2) We ask to update this text because of the following note in the IANA 
>>>> Section:
>>>> "For the Certification Request Information Template and Extension Request 
>>>> Template attributes in Appendix A…"
>>>> 
>>>> We have updated to the Perhaps text above.
>> 
>>  I think that's fine. So please put me as a Y in the AUTH48 status page.
>> 
>>  The 72 character wrapping issue seems editorial to me and not enough to
>> change the Y.
>> 
>>  regards,
>> 
>>  Dan.
>> 
>> -- 
>> "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to
>> escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
>> 
>> 
> 

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

Reply via email to