Hi Qiufang, Thank you for your reply!
Sincerely, Sarah Tarrant RFC Production Center > On Jan 28, 2026, at 11:44 PM, maqiufang (A) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, Sarah, > > Please see my reply below inline... > > Best Regards, > Qiufang > -----Original Message----- > From: Sarah Tarrant [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 6:41 AM > To: maqiufang (A) <[email protected]>; Qin Wu <[email protected]>; > [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: Document intake questions about <draft-ietf-netmod-system-config-19> > > 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. > [Qiufang] I have just posted -20, which address one remaining comment from > the IESG review: to make it clear whether the examples in the appendixes are > normative or informative. There is also one nit fixed: > s/ this model also include/ this model also includes/ > > 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? > [Qiufang] All seem good. > > 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.) > [Qiufang] Usual YANG and NMDA conventions are followed. > > 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://author-tools.ietf.org/idnits>. You can also help the > IETF Tools Team by testing idnits3 <https://author-tools.ietf.org/idnits3/> > with your document and reporting any issues to them. > [Qiufang] References look good to me. > > 4) Is there any text that requires special handling? For example: > *Are there any sections that were contentious when the document was drafted? > *Are any sections that need to be removed before publication marked as such > (e.g., Implementation Status sections (per RFC 7942)). > *Are there any instances of repeated text/sections that should be edited > the same way? > [Qiufang] The only one comment is to replace XXXX with the final RFC number > throughout the draft. > > 5) Because this document updates RFC 8342, please review > the reported errata and confirm whether they have been addressed in this > document or are not relevant: > > * RFC 8342 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/rfc8342) > [Qiufang]I checked the errata and confirm that they are not relevant to this > draft. > > 6) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while editing this > document? > [Qiufang] No. > >> On Jan 26, 2026, at 4:36 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> >> Author(s), >> >> Your document draft-ietf-netmod-system-config-19, which has been approved >> for publication as >> an RFC, has been added to the RFC Editor queue >> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php>. >> >> If your XML file was submitted using the I-D submission tool >> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/>, 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://www.rfc-editor.org/pubprocess/how-we-update/>. >> Next, we will edit for clarity and apply the style guide >> (<https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/>). >> >> You can check the status of your document at >> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php>. >> >> You will receive automatic notifications as your document changes >> queue state (for more information about these states, please see >> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/queue/>). 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]
