Dear RFC Editor:
> 1) <!--[rfced] As [RFC9846] was cited twice in this sentence,
> we have removed the second instance. Please review and let us know
> if you prefer otherwise.
>
> Original:
> | NOTE: Implementations that support TLS 1.3
> | [I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis] should refer to TLS 1.3
> | [I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis] in Sections 4 and 5 of [RFC7589].
>
> Current:
> | NOTE: Implementations that support TLS 1.3 [RFC9846]
> | should refer to TLS 1.3 in Sections 4 and 5 of [RFC7589].
> -->
The proposed rewording looks fine to me.
> 2) <!--[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.
>
> Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)
> -->
The looks fine to me.
> 3) <!-- [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.
> -->
I do not see any concerns.
Russ
--
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
