Hi all,
Instead of having a meeting this month, the RPC has created the
following report.
Please let me know whether you find this report useful and what other
RPC-related information you would like to see on a monthly basis.
This report is also available at
https://notes.ietf.org/rpc-report-202512?view.
Best regards,
Jean
# RFC Production Center Report - December 2025
Previous notes:
https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-interim-2025-rpc-09-rpc?view
RPC project roadmap:
https://github.com/orgs/rfc-editor/projects/2)
## Big Picture
The RPC has been working with IETF Tools Team to overhaul its tools and
website in order to handle RFCs with five-digit numbers and to improve
editor productivity. We are also working to improve the transparency of
RPC processes and to improve our support of author processes.
A full list of the RPC's strategic transformations can be found at the
end of this report, and each project is tied to one or more
transformations (given in parentheses).
## Project Updates
### GitHub Roadmap (Reflecting Changing Author Processes AP-2, AP-3)
The RPC is offering an optional AUTH48 process whereby the RPC shares
its proposed edits with authors using a pull request made against the
approved source file in an RPC-created GitHub repo. This GitHub-based
process is currently being offered on limited basis, and the RPC is
accepting 5 documents per month. For details, see the RPC GitHub
roadmap at
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=rpc_github_roadmap>.
There are currently 11 docs in the queue whose authors have agreed to
participate in this optional process.
The RPC asks authors if they would like to participate when their
documents enter the publication queue via an intake form. As we have
reached the document limit for the month of December, we will start
accepting documents for AUTH48 in GitHub in January. We will limit the
number of documents to 5 per month until we have exercised this AUTH48
process some more.
### Supporting kramdown-rfc as a submission format (Reflecting Changing
Author Processes AP-1)
The RPC is accepting kramdown-rfc files as a submission format on a
limited bases (5 documents per month). Authors can opt in by responding
to the intake form when their document enters the queue.
The RPC will edit these kramdown-rfc files and make them available at
the start of AUTH48. More information about the pilot program can be
found on the RPC wiki
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc>.
There are 18 kramdown-rfc documents in the queue; three of which are
currently in AUTH48. The RPC can accept two more documents via the
intake form for the month of December.
### Updates to SVG guidance (Community Requirements CR-3)
draft-editorial-rswg-svgsinrfcs
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-editorial-rswg-svgsinrfcs/>,
which is now in AUTH48, obsoletes RFC 7997 and sets policy for SVG
artwork. Current guidance can be found at
<https://authors.ietf.org/diagrams>. The RPC is working with the IETF
Tools Team to identify tools updates (i.e., xml2rfc, svgcheck, idnits)
and drafting new guidance that better supports accessibility. This
accessibility guidance will be added to authors.ietf.org.
### RFCXML vocabulary updates (Community Requirements CR-4)
The RPC has been assessing RFCXML vocabulary issues across multiple
issue trackers and has been moving them to a new issue tracker
<https://github.com/ietf-tools/RFCXML>:
* https://github.com/ietf-tools/xml2rfc - the main repo for tools issues
and had been the main repo for vocabulary issues.
* Most of the open issues have been evaluated. We have been working
with the Tools Team to move issues over.
* https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues - 51
open issues.
* We have copied issues from this repo to the RFCXML repo with
pointers to the original discussions.
* https://github.com/rfcseries-wg/new-topics - 28 open issues.
* To be assessed
* https://github.com/jrlevine/draft-rswg-xml2rfcv3-implemented/issues -
4 open issues.
* To be assessed
### Improved queue information (Transparency TR-3, TR-5)
As part of the preparation for discussing a new SLA, the RPC has been
working on requirements for improved queue visualization. We have been
analyzing queue data going back to 2018 and experimenting with different
presentation formats. Goals for new visualization include being able to
assess at a glance queue health and also individual document status.
### Detailed guidance for constructing references (Community
Requirements CR-5)
The RPC has been working on guidance for constructing references for
journals, online content, and documents produced by other standards
development organizations. We are reviewing this content now, and it
will be added to authors.ietf.org early next year.
### Tooling (T)
#### xml2rfc and Self-hosted Fonts
Before IETF 125, the RPC will work with the Tools Team to update the
URLs in existing HTML files of RFCs to point to fonts at
static.ietf.org. This will be a surgical edit to the HTML files rather
than a rerendering. This is to fix an HTML formatting issue where bold
text no longer is displayed as bold in Chrome browsers (The issue was
closed as wontfix <https://issues.chromium.org/issues/447361040>).
#### New Queue Management System: Purple (Process Efficiency PE-3,
Tooling T-2, T-3)
The Tools Team has been working on the replacement of the queue
management system, known as Purple
<https://github.com/ietf-tools/purple>. Focus this month has been on
developing the user interface for capturing final review approvals and
IANA actions, displaying final review information on a publicly facing
web page, assigning RFC numbers, showing document cluster information
graphically, and processing the publications of RFCs.
#### New rfc-editor.org Website: Red (T-2)
The Tools Team has been working on the new website, known as Red
<https://github.com/ietf-tools/red>. Feedback received when Red was
made available during IETF 124 as a beta site is being incorporated, and
work has also been focusing on APIs. Changes that will be made to
existing APIs are documented at
<https://github.com/ietf-tools/red/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md> and include
using RFC numbers that can be 1-5 digits long without leading zeroes.
The use of trailing slashes in URIs will be made consistent. Redirects
may be put into place, so please ensure that your HTTP client is
configured to follow redirects.
#### New Editing Software: DraftForge (T-1)
The Tools Team is building DraftForge <https://draftforge.ietf.org/>, an
editing platform that will provide RFCXML validation, output file
creation, GitHub integration, datatracker submission for I-D authors,
and replacements for the 20+ checker scripts the RPC now runs at the
command line.
To provide more flexibility for users and to reduce future maintenance,
work on DraftForge has shifted from a standalone application to a Visual
Studio Code extension. All existing features have been ported over.
The Tools Team is creating a Docker image that will serve as a
ready-to-use environment for the RPC staff. The image will contain all
DraftForge dependencies and RPC editing scripts.
## Document Work Updates and Hot Topics
**Note:** As docs move through the queue, they go through the following
states: AUTH (for the intake form) -> EDIT (which includes formatting,
reference checking, and content editing) -> RFC-EDITOR (2nd editing
pass, focused on open questions from EDIT, IANA Considerations updates,
and source code validation) -> AUTH48 (author approval) -> AUTH48-DONE
(final checks before publication) -> PUB (final checks, index updates,
public placement of RFCs, and RFC announcement). Different editors
handle these different states, which is why documents are listed
multiple times below. See the RFC Publication Process
<https://authors.ietf.org/rfc-publication-process> for more information.
Alice
* In progress:
* EDIT:
* draft-ietf-regext-rdap-rir-search-19
* Completed (since 19 Nov.)
* EDIT and RFC-EDITOR:
* draft-ietf-netconf-port-numbers-07
* RFC-EDITOR:
* draft-ietf-isis-sr-yang-31 (Cluster 542)
* draft-ietf-ospf-sr-yang-50 (Cluster 542)
* draft-ietf-dhc-rfc8415bis-12
* draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-18 (Cluster 561)
* draft-ietf-lamps-x509-slhdsa-09
* AUTH48:
* draft-ietf-netconf-port-numbers-07
* Published
* 4 RFCs
* Status change
* RFC 7649 to Historic
Lynne
* In progress:
* EDIT:
* draft-ietf-nmop-terminology-23
* AUTH48:
* draft-ietf-manet-dlep-traffic-classification-17 (Cluster 541)
* draft-ietf-manet-dlep-credit-flow-control-19 (Cluster 541)
* draft-ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension-21 (Cluster 541)
* draft-eastlake-fnv-35
* AUTH48-DONE (waiting for companion documents before prepping for
publication):
* draft-ietf-manet-dlep-ether-credit-extension-09 (Cluster 541)
Alanna
* In progress:
* EDIT:
* draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5019bis-12 (Cluster 496)
* draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-04 (Cluster 496)
* draft-ietf-lsr-igp-flex-algo-reverse-affinity-12 (Cluster 496)
* draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo-29 (Cluster C496)
* AUTH48:
* draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis-14 (Cluster 430) - markdown
* draft-ietf-tls-svcb-ech-08 (Cluster 430)
* draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile-05 (Cluster 430)
* Completed:
* EDIT:
* draft-ietf-netconf-over-tls13-04 (Cluster 496)
* AUTH48 (passed along for publication):
* draft-ietf-ospf-sr-yang-50 (Cluster 542)
* draft-ietf-isis-sr-yang-31 (Cluster 542)
* draft-ietf-lamps-x509-slhdsa-09 (Cluster 546)
* draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-21
Madison
* In progress:
* EDIT:
* draft-ietf-emu-rfc7170bis-22 (Cluster 545)
* 123 pages. Wrapping up before Holiday Break.
* AUTH48:
* draft-ietf-asdf-sdf-24
* draft-ietf-lamps-rfc7030-csrattrs-23 (Cluster 545)
* draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-15 (Cluster 430) - markdown
* draft-ietf-tls-esni-25 (Cluster 430) - markdown
* Errata:
* Managing errata mail as needed.
* Misc:
* Taking notes on the Markdown EDIT/AUTH48 processes and keeping
track of what works/what does not work from the Primary Editor’s
perspective. Also brainstorming potential tweaks/improvements.
* Completed:
* November Errata:
* Submitted: 40 (~65% Technical)
* Editorial → Technical: 3
* Deleted as spam: 15
* Verified: 7
* Rejected: 0
* Hold For Document Update: 2
* Note: These numbers include reports marked as
Rejected/Verified/HFDU by both the RPC and ADs and only reflect errata
reports that were submitted after 11/1.
Sarah
* In progress:
* Documents on deck for formatting: 2
* Completed:
* Added to the queue: 9
* Sent intake forms: 8 (still waiting on 3)
* Received and got approval for new draft version: 5
* Formatted documents: 14
Rebecca
* In progress:
* RFC-EDITOR:
* draft-editorial-rswg-rfc9280-updates-04 - markdown/GitHub
* AUTH48:
* draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-18 (Cluster 561)
* Completed:
* EDIT:
* draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-18 (Cluster 561)
* RFC-EDITOR:
* draft-ietf-tls-svcb-ech-08 (Cluster 430)
* draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile-05 (Cluster 430)
Megan
* In progress:
* EDIT:
* draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-28
* AUTH/REF:
* draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-18 (Cluster 405)
* draft-ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm-31 (Cluster 405)
* draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model-20 (Cluster 405)
* draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm-26 (Cluster 405)
* draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-32 (Cluster 405)
* AUTH48:
* draft-ietf-stir-servprovider-oob-08
* draft-ietf-dhc-rfc8415bis-12
Kaelin
* In progress:
* EDIT:
* draft-ietf-raw-technologies-17 (Cluster 538)
* draft-ietf-raw-architecture-30 (Cluster 538)
* AUTH48:
* draft-editorial-rswg-svgsinrfcs-04
* Completed and passed along for publication:
* draft-ietf-netmod-acl-extensions-17
Ted
* Completed 20 reference reviews since last community call
* In-progress
* draft-briscoe-docsis-q-protection-07
* draft-ietf-scitt-architecture-22
* draft-lim-apv-09
* draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report-04
* draft-ietf-tls-hybrid-design-16
* draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication-36
* draft-ietf-tls-tls13-pkcs1-07
* draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-client-server-41
* draft-ietf-httpbis-safe-method-w-body-14
* Other reference updates:
* The tools team created a tool to compile a BibTeX file of RFCs:
https://github.com/kesara/rfc-bibtex (Thanks Kesara!)
* Reference Style Guidance updates: I have a draft of this prepared.
Next steps:
1) RPC reviews and I make edits based of comments/suggestions
2) IESG/Stream managers review and I make edits based of
comments/suggestions.
3) Publish on authors.ietf.org.
Sandy
* In progress:
* EDIT:
* draft-ietf-6lo-updating-rfc-8928-05 (Cluster 547)
* draft-ietf-6lo-prefix-registration-18 (Cluster 547)
* AUTH48:
* draft-ietf-drip-registries
* Completed:
* EDIT:
* draft-ietf-drip-registries
* RFC-EDITOR:
* draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-tls13
* draft-ietf-drip-registries
* draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis (Cluster 430) - markdown
* AUTH48 (passed along for publication):
* draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-tls13
* draft-ietf-oauth-selective-disclosure-jwt
* Published:
* 7 RFCs
Karen
* In progress:
* EDIT:
* draft-ietf-roll-dao-projection-40 (Cluster 538)
* AUTH48:
* draft-ietf-tsvwg-multipath-dccp-24
* Completed:
* EDIT:
* draft-editorial-rswg-rfc9280-updates-04 - markdown/GitHub
* RFC-EDITOR:
* draft-ietf-lamps-rfc7030-csrattrs-23 (Cluster 545)
* draft-eastlake-fnv-35
## FYIs
Winter break closure: The RPC will close Dec 25 and reopen January 5.
We will respond to AUTH48 threads when we return in January, but will be
monitoring [email protected] for any emergencies.
Stats:
* [Queue
stats](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=20251216-stats)
as of December 2025
* [Average processing
times](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=wiki:20251216-summary-stats.png)
for EDIT through AUTH48: 12.4 weeks
* View updates as the year progresses at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/report-summary/
----
## Strategic Transformations
The full list of strategic transformations is provided here for reference.
### Productivity
#### Process Efficiency (PE)
1. One editor does many tasks --> Specialists provide expertise in
document intake, formatting, reference checking. (PE-1)
2. The RPC has no information regarding the authors' intentions that
shaped the creation of the document (e.g., is the document supposed to
be similar to another RFC?), requiring considerable work to figure out
intentions --> The document comes with as much information as possible
from the authors, thus reducing RPC workload. (PE-2)
3. Editing notes about a document are split across multiple places
(mailing list, ARO style sheet, internal wiki) --> All editing notes
about a document are in a single, easily accessible place. (PE-3)
4. (Closed) There is lack of a documented process for the rare case when
a document is of such poor editorial quality that it should be returned
to the stream for improvements --> A documented process that includes
guidance on how the RPC team identifies such a document early in the
process. (PE-4)
5. The RPC's internal procedure documentation conflates copyediting
guidance and tools details, making maintenance difficult --> modular,
easier-to-maintain procedures for copyediting and tools. (PE-5)
#### Tooling (T)
1. Editing requires lots of time-consuming manual work --> As much as
possible is automated. (T-1)
2. The production platform is very old and is time-consuming to maintain
--> Professionally designed and written production platform. (T-2)
3. ADs struggle with finding RPC requests --> RPC requests are found on
the AD dashboard. (T-3)
#### Community Requirements (CR)
1. RPC does lots of work, some of which may not be required to be done
by the RPC --> RPC only does the work it needs to do, with clearly
defined limits of the RPC's responsibility for document quality, beyond
which it is the responsibility of the authors. (CR-1)
2. Lots of time-consuming manual work due to sizable RFCXML feature set
--> Less work due to streamlined RFCXML feature set. (CR-2)
3. Out-of-date and rigid SVG guidance --> more flexible guidance that
supports accessibility. (CR-3)
4. RFCXML v3 issues spread out in multiple places --> consolidated place
for all vocab-related issues. (CR-4)
5. The RFC Style Guide (7322bis) is stuck in a perpetual I-D state
because we don't know when we are done --> Split into an RFC containing
guiding principles and use authors.ietf.org to capture details. (CR-5)
6. No guidance on accessibility --> Guidance and training for authors
that helps them make their documents accessible. (CR-6)
### Transparency (TR)
1. The inner workings of the RPC are opaque to the IETF community, which
means that the nature and value of the work is not understood --> Inner
workings of the RPC are sufficiently transparent for the IETF community
to understand the value of the work. (TR-1)
2. Private communications channels with the community create issues such
as hidden decisions, poor attitude, and repeated questions --> All
communications with the community are through open channels. (TR-2)
3. Authors lack details about their documents' progress through the
queue --> A document's progress through the queue is clearer and more
detailed. (TR-3)
4. RPC doesn't have a personal aspect, and is just seen as a black-box
service. The tenure and skills of the team are not known --> The
community knows the team and their tenure and skills. (TR-4)
5. Current SLA is not fit for purpose --> An SLA that is fit for
purpose, adapted to the RPC's specific circumstances, and covering
qualitative and quantitative measures. (TR-5)
### Reflecting Changing Author Processes (AP)
1. The RPC does not accept markdown as a submission format --> The RPC
accepts and edits markdown documents. (AP-1)
2. The RPC uses a shared file system and manual version control --> The
RPC uses a modern version control system. (AP-2)
3. Authors are frustrated backporting RPC edits to their repos --> There
are processes and tools that support an author's use of GitHub. (AP-3)
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
