Hi all, These changes are complete:
https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-parameters https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-extensiontype-values thanks, Amanda On Wed Dec 17 19:25:24 2025, [email protected] wrote: > IANA, > > Please update the note on the "Recommended" column as follows for the > registries below: > TLS ExtensionType Values > TLS Cipher Suites > TLS Supported Groups > TLS Exporter Labels > TLS Certificate Types > TLS HashAlgorithm > TLS SignatureAlgorithm > TLS ClientCertificateType Identifiers > TLS PskKeyExchangeMode > TLS SignatureScheme > > Current: > If "Recommended" column is set to "N", it does not necessarily > mean that it is flawed; rather, it indicates that the item either > has not been through the IETF consensus process, has limited > applicability, or is intended only for specific use cases. If the > "Recommended" column is set to "D," the item is discouraged and > SHOULD NOT or MUST NOT be used, depending upon the situation; > consult the item's references for clarity. > > Updated (add "the" before "Recommended"): > If the "Recommended" column is set to "N", it does not necessarily > mean that it is flawed; rather, it indicates that the item either > has not been through the IETF consensus process, has limited > applicability, or is intended only for specific use cases. If the > "Recommended" column is set to "D," the item is discouraged and > SHOULD NOT or MUST NOT be used, depending upon the situation; > consult the item's references for clarity. > > Thank you! > > Madison Church > RFC Production Center > > > On Dec 17, 2025, at 6:36 AM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Thanks! > > > > spt > > > >> On Dec 16, 2025, at 16:20, Madison Church <[email protected] > >> editor.org> 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] > >>>> editor.org> 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] > >>>>>> editor.org> 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] > >>>>>>> editor.org> 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 tls- > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [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 <rfc-editor@rfc- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> editor.org> 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]
