Hi Reshma,

Thank you for the update! Yes, please submit a new version through the 
datatracker with those additions.

Sincerely,
Sarah Tarrant
RFC Production Center

> On Jan 6, 2026, at 11:06 AM, Reshma Das <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Sarah,
> 
> While reviewing the questions, I identified an issue with one of the authors’ 
> email addresses. I am trying to reach out and rectify this and will provide 
> an update as soon as possible.
> 
> Additionally, I am updating the Juniper team’s email IDs to their HPE 
> addresses. (Post HPE acquisition of Juniper)
> 
> We have also received the following comment from IANA, which needs to be 
> incorporated:
> 
> "NOTE: The IANA Considerations section should be updated to remove the 
> lowercase "transitive" and "non-transitive" from what appears to be the 
> "Name" field. The registries already identify their contents as "transitive" 
> and "non-transitive," and the paragraph above each name does so as well. We 
> are also removing "Extended Community" from the name, as all assignments in 
> these registries are for extended communities."
> 
> Given these changes, I am planning to publish a new version. Please confirm 
> if this approach is acceptable.
> 
> Best regards,
> Reshma Das 
> 
> 
> 
> Juniper Business Use Only
> From: Reshma Das <[email protected]>
> Date: Monday, January 5, 2026 at 7:57 AM
> To: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
> <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, 
> [email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
> <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
> <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
> <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Document intake questions about 
> <draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth-23>
> 
> Hi Sarah,
> Thank you for reaching out. I’m catching up on emails and will review this 
> today. I’ll get back to you before EOD.
> Thanks & Regards,
> Reshma Das
> 
> 
> Get Outlook for Mac
> From: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]>
> Date: Monday, January 5, 2026 at 7:53 AM
> To: [email protected] <[email protected]>, Reshma Das 
> <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, 
> [email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
> <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
> <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
> <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Document intake questions about 
> <draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth-23>
> 
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
> 
> 
> 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 22, 2025, at 3:17 PM, Sarah Tarrant <[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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://author-tools.ietf.org/idnits__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BroHw_knp0SZgyRcGH3mxpq6QSm3M-N3Zaaa4zFw8hrEqPof_-Aib_4BheftR6FkjHigI15CZ2oHz2Bu-yHmdvw-BA$
> >  >. You can also help the
> > IETF Tools Team by testing idnits3 
> > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://author-tools.ietf.org/idnits3/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BroHw_knp0SZgyRcGH3mxpq6QSm3M-N3Zaaa4zFw8hrEqPof_-Aib_4BheftR6FkjHigI15CZ2oHz2Bu-yEj-g0YlQ$
> >  >
> > 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?
> >
> >
> >> On Dec 22, 2025, at 3:14 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >> Author(s),
> >>
> >> Your document draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth-23, which has been approved 
> >> for publication as
> >> an RFC, has been added to the RFC Editor queue
> >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BroHw_knp0SZgyRcGH3mxpq6QSm3M-N3Zaaa4zFw8hrEqPof_-Aib_4BheftR6FkjHigI15CZ2oHz2Bu-yHmB0oBKQ$
> >>  >.
> >>
> >> If your XML file was submitted using the I-D submission tool
> >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BroHw_knp0SZgyRcGH3mxpq6QSm3M-N3Zaaa4zFw8hrEqPof_-Aib_4BheftR6FkjHigI15CZ2oHz2Bu-yGyXyVZzg$
> >>  >, we have already retrieved it
> >> and have started working on it.
> >>
> >> If you did not submit the file via the I-D submission tool, or
> >> if you have an updated version (e.g., updated contact information),
> >> please send us the file at this time by attaching it
> >> in your reply to this message and specifying any differences
> >> between the approved I-D and the file that you are providing.
> >>
> >> You will receive a separate message from us asking for style input.
> >> Please respond to that message.  When we have received your response,
> >> your document will then move through the queue. The first step that
> >> we take as your document moves through the queue is converting it to
> >> RFCXML (if it is not already in RFCXML) and applying the formatting
> >> steps listed at 
> >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/pubprocess/how-we-update/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BroHw_knp0SZgyRcGH3mxpq6QSm3M-N3Zaaa4zFw8hrEqPof_-Aib_4BheftR6FkjHigI15CZ2oHz2Bu-yHH7C8yTQ$
> >>  >.
> >> Next, we will edit for clarity and apply the style guide
> >> (<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BroHw_knp0SZgyRcGH3mxpq6QSm3M-N3Zaaa4zFw8hrEqPof_-Aib_4BheftR6FkjHigI15CZ2oHz2Bu-yE4lGvRCg$
> >>  >).
> >>
> >> You can check the status of your document at
> >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BroHw_knp0SZgyRcGH3mxpq6QSm3M-N3Zaaa4zFw8hrEqPof_-Aib_4BheftR6FkjHigI15CZ2oHz2Bu-yHmB0oBKQ$
> >>  >.
> >>
> >> You will receive automatic notifications as your document changes
> >> queue state (for more information about these states, please see
> >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/queue/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BroHw_knp0SZgyRcGH3mxpq6QSm3M-N3Zaaa4zFw8hrEqPof_-Aib_4BheftR6FkjHigI15CZ2oHz2Bu-yFfN6rBwA$
> >>  >). When we have completed
> >> our edits, we will move your document to AUTH48 state and ask you
> >> to perform a final review of the document.
> >>
> >> Please let us know if you have any questions.
> >>
> >> Thank you.
> >>
> >> The RFC Editor Team
> >>
> >
> 

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

Reply via email to