Hi Sara, thank you for your reminder. We will get back to you soon.
Best Regards Roland -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> Gesendet: Montag, 5. Januar 2026 16:51 An: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Schott, Roland <[email protected]>; [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Betreff: Re: Document intake questions abou <draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-17> Hi Author(s), This is a friendly reminder that we await answers to the questions below before continuing with the editing process for this document. Thank you, Sarah Tarrant RFC Production Center > On Dec 19, 2025, at 4:34 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > Author(s), > > Congratulations, your document has been successfully added to the RFC Editor > queue! > The team at the RFC Production Center (RPC) is looking forward to > working with you as your document moves forward toward publication. To > help reduce processing time and improve editing accuracy, please > respond to the questions below. Please confer with your coauthors (or > authors of other documents if your document is in a > cluster) as necessary prior to taking action in order to streamline > communication. > If your document has multiple authors, only one author needs to reply > to this message. > > As you read through the rest of this email: > > * If you need/want to make updates to your document, we encourage you > to make those changes and resubmit to the Datatracker. This allows for > the easy creation of diffs, which facilitates review by interested parties > (e.g., authors, ADs, doc shepherds). > * If you feel no updates to the document are necessary, please reply > with any applicable rationale/comments. > > > Please note that the RPC team will not work on your document until we > hear from you (that is, your document will remain in AUTH state until > we receive a reply). Even if you don't have guidance or don't feel > that you need to make any updates to the document, you need to let us > know. After we hear from you, your document will start moving through > the queue. You will be able to review and approve our updates during AUTH48. > > Please feel free to contact us with any questions you may have at > [email protected]. > > Thank you! > The RPC Team > > -- > > 1) As there may have been multiple updates made to the document during > Last Call, please review the current version of the document: > > * Is the text in the Abstract still accurate? > * Are the Authors' Addresses, Contributors, and Acknowledgments > sections current? > > > 2) Please share any style information that could help us with editing > your document. For example: > > * Is your document's format or its terminology based on another document? > If so, please provide a pointer to that document (e.g., this > document's terminology should match DNS terminology in RFC 9499). > * Is there a pattern of capitalization or formatting of terms? (e.g., > field names should have initial capitalization; parameter names should > be in double quotes; <tt/> should be used for token names; etc.) > > > 3) Please review the entries in the References section carefully with > the following in mind. Note that we will update as follows unless we > hear otherwise at this time: > > * References to obsoleted RFCs will be updated to point to the current > RFC on the topic in accordance with Section 4.8.6 of RFC 7322 (RFC > Style Guide). > > * References to I-Ds that have been replaced by another I-D will be > updated to point to the replacement I-D. > > * References to documents from other organizations that have been > superseded will be updated to their superseding version. > > Note: To check for outdated RFC and I-D references, you can use idnits > <https://aut/ > hor-tools.ietf.org%2Fidnits&data=05%7C02%7CRoland.Schott%40telekom.de% > 7C326ba11cdc01493f702008de4c725543%7Cbde4dffc4b604cf68b04a5eeb25f5c4f% > 7C0%7C0%7C639032251226899271%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiO > nRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ% > 3D%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=5pirYaiiFjSBcufGUO%2BGjn8DNcO31ZAOfGRxO5r > t9F0%3D&reserved=0>. You can also help the IETF Tools Team by testing > idnits3 > <https://aut/ > hor-tools.ietf.org%2Fidnits3%2F&data=05%7C02%7CRoland.Schott%40telekom > .de%7C326ba11cdc01493f702008de4c725543%7Cbde4dffc4b604cf68b04a5eeb25f5 > c4f%7C0%7C0%7C639032251226928827%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hc > GkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjo > yfQ%3D%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=y64o%2BuwLOE93QmPKpO0nYMKr8BUIKVyiXSa > u2xR98hI%3D&reserved=0> with your document and reporting any issues to > them. > > > 4) Is there any text that should be handled extra cautiously? For > example, are there any sections that were contentious when the document was > drafted? > > > 5) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while > editing this document? > > > 6) This document uses one or more of the following text styles. > Are these elements used consistently? > > * fixed width font (<tt/> or `) > * italics (<em/> or *) > * bold (<strong/> or **) > > > 7) This document contains sourcecode: > > * Does the sourcecode validate? > * Some sourcecode types (e.g., YANG) require certain references and/or > text in the Security Considerations section. Is this information correct? > * Is the sourcecode type indicated in the XML? (See information about > types: > https://www/. > rfc-editor.org%2Frpc%2Fwiki%2Fdoku.php%3Fid%3Dsourcecode-types&data=05 > %7C02%7CRoland.Schott%40telekom.de%7C326ba11cdc01493f702008de4c725543% > 7Cbde4dffc4b604cf68b04a5eeb25f5c4f%7C0%7C0%7C639032251226946805%7CUnkn > own%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJX > aW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=QyFMkE > zeZxJ0X%2FlHBArE0U9mIcV5MDFOlyu7icGPhNY%3D&reserved=0.) > > > 8) This document is part of Cluster 463. > > * To help the reader understand the content of the cluster, is there a > document in the cluster that should be read first? Next? If so, please > provide the order and we will provide RFC numbers for the documents > accordingly. > If order is not important, please let us know. > * Is there any text that has been repeated within the cluster document > that should be edited in the same way (for instance, parallel > introductory text or Security Considerations)? > * For more information about clusters, see > https://www/. > rfc-editor.org%2Fabout%2Fclusters%2F&data=05%7C02%7CRoland.Schott%40te > lekom.de%7C326ba11cdc01493f702008de4c725543%7Cbde4dffc4b604cf68b04a5ee > b25f5c4f%7C0%7C0%7C639032251226964205%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0 > eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIl > dUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=HRWmw2zECw5ryl0VjD2imD7TIHu%2BvW > c3LXTIp440opg%3D&reserved=0 > * For a list of all current clusters, see: > http://www.r/ > fc-editor.org%2Fall_clusters.php&data=05%7C02%7CRoland.Schott%40teleko > m.de%7C326ba11cdc01493f702008de4c725543%7Cbde4dffc4b604cf68b04a5eeb25f > 5c4f%7C0%7C0%7C639032251226986575%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1h > cGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIj > oyfQ%3D%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2BTWTweFneyEp0PJqVX77AlMI1cXcZJ7hRr > ZWeRMD1Fo%3D&reserved=0 > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
