Hi Alanna
Approved.
Matthew
*From: *Alanna Paloma <apal...@staff.rfc-editor.org>
*Date: *Wednesday, 21 May 2025 at 17:12
*To: *Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com>
*Cc: *James Guichard <james.n.guich...@futurewei.com>, Kireeti
Kompella <kireeti.i...@gmail.com>, Stewart Bryant
<s...@stewartbryant.com>, Matthew Bocci (Nokia)
<matthew.bo...@nokia.com>, l...@pi.nu <l...@pi.nu>, Jie Dong
<jie.d...@huawei.com>, Rebecca VanRheenen <rvanrhee...@staff.rfc-
editor.org>, RFC Editor <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org>, mpls-...@ietf.org
<mpls-...@ietf.org>, MPLS Working Group <mpls-cha...@ietf.org>, Adrian
Farrel <adr...@olddog.co.uk>, auth48archive <auth48archive@rfc-
editor.org>
*Subject: *Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9790 <draft-ietf-mpls-1stnibble-13>
for your review
CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when
clicking links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for
additional information.
Hi Greg,
Thank you for your approval. It has been noted on the AUTH48 status page:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9790 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/
auth48/rfc9790>
We will await approvals from Kireeti, Stewart, Matthew, Loa, and Jie
prior to moving this document forward in the publication process.
Best regards,
RFC Editor/ap
On May 20, 2025, at 2:04 PM, Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Alanna,
Thank you for keeping up with all the updates. I read Loa's latest
update and agree with it. Hence, I agree with all the updates applied
during AUTH48.
Please let me know if you have any further questions.
Regards,
Greg
On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 10:40 AM Alanna Paloma <apal...@staff.rfc-
editor.org> wrote:
Hi James, Loa, and other authors,
James - Thank you for your approval. It has been noted on the AUTH48
status page:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9790 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/
auth48/rfc9790>
Authors - We have updated the files per Loa’s updated text (see below).
We will await approvals from each party listed on the AUTH48 status
page prior to moving this document forward in the publication process.
— FILES (please refresh) —
Updated XML file:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.xml <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/authors/rfc9790.xml>
Updated output files:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.txt <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/authors/rfc9790.txt>
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.pdf <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/authors/rfc9790.pdf>
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.html <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/authors/rfc9790.html>
Diff file showing all changes made during AUTH48:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-auth48diff.html <https://
www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-auth48diff.html>
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-auth48rfcdiff.html <https://
www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-auth48rfcdiff.html> (side by side)
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-lastdiff.html <https://
www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-lastdiff.html> (htmlwdiff diff
between last version and this)
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-lastrfcdiff.html <https://
www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-lastrfcdiff.html> (rfcdiff between
last version and this)
Diff files showing all changes:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-diff.html <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/authors/rfc9790-diff.html>
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-rfcdiff.html <https://
www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-rfcdiff.html> (side by side)
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-alt-diff.html <https://
www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-alt-diff.html> (diff showing
changes where text is moved or deleted)
Best regards,
RFC Editor/ap
On May 20, 2025, at 3:09 AM, James Guichard
<james.n.guich...@futurewei.com> wrote:
Approved.
Jim
From: Alanna Paloma <apal...@staff.rfc-editor.org>
Date: Monday, May 19, 2025 at 4:27 PM
To: James Guichard <james.n.guich...@futurewei.com>, Greg Mirsky
<gregimir...@gmail.com>, Matthew Bocci (Nokia) <matthew.bo...@nokia.com>
Cc: Rebecca VanRheenen <rvanrhee...@staff.rfc-editor.org>, Kireeti
Kompella <kireeti.i...@gmail.com>, Stewart Bryant
<s...@stewartbryant.com>, Jie Dong <jie.d...@huawei.com>,
l...@pi.nu<l...@pi.nu>, RFC Editor <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org>, mpls-
a...@ietf.org<mpls-...@ietf.org>, MPLS Working Group <mpls-
cha...@ietf.org>, Adrian Farrel
<adr...@olddog.co.uk>, auth48archive <auth48archive@rfc-editor.org>
Subject: [AD] Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9790 <draft-ietf-
mpls-1stnibble-13> for your review
Hi Matthew, Greg, and James (AD)*,
*James - As the AD, please review and approve of the updated text
and removal of the BCP 14 keyword “MUST”.
Original:
Post-stack Header (PSH): optional field of interest to the egress
Label Switching Router (LSR) (and possibly to transit LSRs).
Examples include a control word [RFC4385], [RFC8964] or an
associated channel [RFC4385], [RFC5586], [RFC9546]. The PSH MUST
indicate its length, so that a parser knows where the embedded
packet starts.
Current:
Post-Stack Header (PSH): A field containing information that may be
of interest to the egress Label Switching Router (LSR) or
transit
LSRs. Examples include a control word [RFC4385] [RFC8964] or an
associated channel header [RFC4385] [RFC5586] [RFC9546]. A
parser
needs to be able to determine where the PSH ends in order to
find
the embedded packet.
See this diff file:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-ad-
diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323372404%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Mn1qJ5aNIhJbyj32kakK9Vd%2FMLL8DRIaX03wI8hAII4%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-ad-diff.html>
Authors - Thank you for your replies. We have updated as
requested. We will await any further changes you may have and
approvals from each author
and *James prior to moving forward in the publication process.
— FILES (please refresh) —
Updated XML file:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790.xml&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323393490%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=RBmYo%2Ft3nBfKzWDlWsC6EDhR5SKWbphgbd4UDJLOACs%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.xml>
Updated output files:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790.txt&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323410190%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fj96DQft0eI90YG0zx8POcim0kafmeO39Py8Bsmnidk%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.txt>
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323425302%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=O9zOXBJqS18BHY2gc5qVBXftXZheTQPkzwfIWfjR6OI%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.pdf>
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323439783%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=EH2MUK93taunO23fWXHPWdZ2dnjdsRuisma7P6XqkZ4%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.html>
Diff file showing all changes made during AUTH48:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
auth48diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323454124%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=m7Dhkxsd%2BiQ5jbUMM5nu3Ejtj025uxhbTBu34GAots0%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-auth48diff.html>
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
auth48rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323468768%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=u7QXcJCSQYoHIgADEyrUAQciGtpemaihm4ec3qfybFs%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-auth48rfcdiff.html> (side by side)
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
lastdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323483292%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=S%2BBLiKjKhyVzm%2BG5asy7d2Fc%2BkYP6hZLlqQlOJHDb%2Fw%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-lastdiff.html> (htmlwdiff diff between last
version and this)
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
lastrfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323498056%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=I9kUzX5YXE%2FCsSicvxQU0VS2xenDQFbi1mOp1N9lQNw%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-lastrfcdiff.html> (rfcdiff between last
version and this)
Diff files showing all changes:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323512751%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=obFCGOeTBeFZrZ%2Fp6nPEEOtk4uzo1Tjj1hYEyt9WEdE%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-diff.html>
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323527016%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=YfpCj94Gj3NT6cArD6PITpapEavuqFwuJ5OwMFqOQPE%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-rfcdiff.html> (side by side)
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-alt-
diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323541323%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=NgRtFDscbNBEYiLqDZ3%2FXJ5j7d1X6HDEs%2BHw4fYnokU%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-alt-diff.html> (diff showing changes where
text is moved or deleted)
For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauth48%2Frfc9790&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323560089%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=hG%2FK2fw8yqjr01EjWx6FbVXQmbIL8aDfzj0vysq3nf0%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9790>
Thank you,
RFC Editor/ap
On May 19, 2025, at 9:47 AM, Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Rebecca,
I agree with the updates proposed by Matthew.
Regards,
Greg
On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 3:17 AM Matthew Bocci (Nokia)
<matthew.bo...@nokia.com> wrote:
Hi Rebecca
Thanks for the updated Auth48 text. I have a couple of comments.
Regards
Matthew
1. Introduction:
I think PSH in the second sentence should be pluralised:
OLD:
Examples of PSH include existing artifacts such as control words
[RFC4385], BIER (Bit Index Explicit Replication) headers [RFC8296]
and the like, as well as new types of PSH being discussed by the MPLS
Working Group.
NEW:
Examples of PSHs include existing artifacts such as control words
[RFC4385], BIER (Bit Index Explicit Replication) headers [RFC8296]
and the like, as well as new types of PSH being discussed by the MPLS
Working Group.
2.1 Definitions:
The definition of PSH is a bit unclear in terms of what it is
referring to for the optional field of interest, and it is also
mandates that the PSH must include a length when in fact most
existing PSHs (such as the PW CW or G-ACH) do not include such a
field. I would propose rephrasing to:
OLD:
Post-Stack Header (PSH):
Optional field of interest to the egress Label Switching Router
(LSR) (and possibly to transit LSRs). Examples include a control word
[RFC4385] [RFC8964] or an associated channel [RFC4385] [RFC5586]
[RFC9546]. The PSH MUST indicate its length, so that a parser knows
where the embedded packet starts.
NEW:
Post-Stack Header (PSH):
A field containing information which may be of interest to the
egress Label Switching Router (LSR) or transit LSRs. Examples include
a control word [RFC4385] [RFC8964] or an associated channel header
[RFC4385] [RFC5586] [RFC9546]. A parser needs to be able to determine
where the PSH ends in order to find the embedded packet.
Best regards,
Matthew
From: Rebecca VanRheenen <rvanrhee...@staff.rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thursday, 15 May 2025 at 22:01
To: Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com>, Kireeti Kompella
<kireeti.i...@gmail.com>, Stewart Bryant <s...@stewartbryant.com>,
Matthew Bocci (Nokia) <matthew.bo...@nokia.com>, Jie Dong
<jie.d...@huawei.com>, l...@pi.nu <l...@pi.nu>
Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org>, mpls-...@ietf.org
<mpls-...@ietf.org>, MPLS Working Group <mpls-cha...@ietf.org>,
Adrian Farrel <adr...@olddog.co.uk>, James Guichard
<james.n.guich...@futurewei.com>, auth48archive <auth48archive@rfc-
editor.org>
Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9790 <draft-ietf-
mpls-1stnibble-13> for your review
[You don't often get email from rvanrhee...@staff.rfc-editor.org.
Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/
LearnAboutSenderIdentification <https://aka.ms/
LearnAboutSenderIdentification> ]
CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when
clicking links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for
additional information.
Hi Greg and other authors,
Greg - Thank you for addressing all of our questions! We have
updated the document accordingly.
All - Please review the document carefully to ensure satisfaction
as we do not make changes once it has been published as an RFC.
Contact us with any further updates or with your approval of the
document in its current form. We will await approvals from each
author prior to moving forward in the publication process.
— FILES (please refresh) —
Updated XML file:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790.xml&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323580473%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=yDNy3QEqoveZBJq0GSejSlP2GNq%2FQ8YFJ0II5smsvEg%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.xml>
Updated output files:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790.txt&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323599915%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=CTRqZPNHQPlEss0V1mHyXtcGFFMeCqUOOg68zi2avW8%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.txt>
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323619271%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Woob8OVRyugHw8Zz5gnuh9mgAlFGiLqHBj%2FKwb9Rkxc%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.pdf>
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323638798%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fnT5qcPz5154N1I3Lj0NmUZCoRLBDYA1%2BwnKtasL5nM%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.html>
Diff file showing all changes made during AUTH48:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
auth48diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323657961%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=P0HIxhZm5eXvcdwE7jJmKBnTy8Ol%2B2IGxAFgDeU4Zm4%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-auth48diff.html>
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
auth48rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323672591%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=rhETRCSOf8ypvKGV32KcIGz3YXbpp81CqymxAnxrR4w%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-auth48rfcdiff.html> (side by side)
Diff files showing all changes:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323687123%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=N5M%2B7BJ6TGX%2BvmJq2F44ZdoJqE5NL%2BNlGuyY%2BK1T1JA%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-diff.html>
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323860235%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=QhW0yTrpZVAwFgsTUDrF6oMRQ6aOw1uVPElortE0g9Q%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-rfcdiff.html> (side by side)
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-alt-
diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323877348%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=2cnulI1GBGxGlS65hjriEUDaYr%2BoG5N3kpnNNQ8aEYs%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-alt-diff.html> (diff showing changes where
text is moved or deleted)
For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauth48%2Frfc9790&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323891853%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=aURgAcuCaC3udJd1r2VyQZ6xps5xK9JLJpvorNdu8e0%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9790>
Thank you,
RFC Editor/rv
On May 14, 2025, at 4:41 PM, Greg Mirsky
<gregimir...@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear RFC Editor,
thank you for your help in improving this document. Please find
my notes below tagged GIM>>.
Regards,
Greg
From: rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wednesday, 14 May 2025 at 05:24
To: kireeti.i...@gmail.com <kireeti.i...@gmail.com>,
s...@stewartbryant.com<s...@stewartbryant.com>, Matthew Bocci (Nokia)
<matthew.bo...@nokia.com>, gregimir...@gmail.com
<gregimir...@gmail.com>, l...@pi.nu <l...@pi.nu>, jie.d...@huawei.com
<jie.d...@huawei.com>
Cc: rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org>,
mpls-...@ietf.org<mpls-...@ietf.org>, mpls-cha...@ietf.org <mpls-
cha...@ietf.org>, adr...@olddog.co.uk <adr...@olddog.co.uk>,
james.n.guich...@futurewei.com<james.n.guich...@futurewei.com>,
auth48archive@rfc-editor.org<auth48archive@rfc-editor.org>
Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9790 <draft-ietf-
mpls-1stnibble-13> for your review
CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when
clicking links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for
additional information.
Authors,
While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as
necessary) the following questions, which are also in the XML file.
1) <!-- [rfced] Please note that the abbreviated title of the
document has been
updated as follows. The abbreviated title only appears in the
running
header in the pdf output.
Original:
1st nibble
Current:
First Nibble Following Label Stack
GIM>> Thank you; I agree.
-->
2) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that
appear in
the title) for use on https://
eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fsearch&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323906142%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gJM%2FVuM5%2F%2BeT7ejIc64liY0F0mUyZoptsIG7t%2FptpbA%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/search>. -->
GIM>> Perhaps
Post-stack header
Load-balancing
3) <!-- [rfced] Please clarify "in the context associated".
Note that there
is a similar sentence in the IANA section.
Original:
Although some existing network
devices may use such a method, it needs to be stressed that the
correct interpretation of the Post-stack First Nibble (PFN)
in a PSH
can be made only in the context associated using the control or
management plane with the Label Stack Element (LSE) or group
of LSEs
in the preceding label stack that characterize the type of
the PSH,
and that any attempt to rely on the value in any other
context is
unreliable.
Perhaps:
Although some existing network
devices may use such a method, it needs to be stressed that the
correct interpretation of the Post-stack First Nibble (PFN)
in a PSH
can be made only in the context of using the control or
management plane with the Label Stack Entry (LSE) or group
of LSEs
in the preceding label stack that characterizes the type of
the PSH.
Any attempt to rely on the value in any other context is
unreliable.
Or (similar to sentence in IANA section):
Although some existing network
devices may use such a method, it needs to be stressed that the
correct interpretation of the Post-stack First Nibble (PFN)
in a PSH
can be made only in the context of the Label Stack Entry
(LSE) or group of LSEs
in the preceding label stack that characterizes the type of
the PSH.
Any attempt to rely on the value in any other context is
unreliable.
GIM>> Thank you for your creative options. I will propose
another re-wording using the first option with s/of using/established
through/:
Although some existing network
devices may use such a method, it needs to be stressed that the
correct interpretation of the Post-stack First Nibble (PFN)
in a PSH
can be made only in the context established through the
control or
management plane with the Label Stack Entry (LSE) or group
of LSEs
in the preceding label stack that characterizes the type of
the PSH.
Any attempt to rely on the value in any other context is
unreliable. -->
4) <!-- [rfced] How may we update the text starting with
"including..." to
improve clarity?
Original:
* To stress the importance that any MPLS packet not
carrying plain
IPv4 or IPv6 packets contains a PSH, including any new
version of
IP (Section 2.4).
Perhaps:
* To stress that any MPLS packet not carrying plain
IPv4 or IPv6 packets contains a PSH. This also applies to
packets of
any new version of IP (see Section 2.4).
GIM>> Excellent! I agree.
-->
5) <!-- [rfced] The sentences below are from the last two
paragraphs of Section 1.
In the first sentence, will readers understand what is meant by
"the
heuristic"? Would it be helpful to add more context, like that
included
in the second sentence?
Original:
Based on the analysis of load-balancing techniques in
Section 2.1.1,
this document, in Section 2.1.1.1, introduces a requirement
that
deprecates the use of the heuristic and recommends using a
dedicated
label value for load balancing.
...
Furthermore, this document updates [RFC4928] by deprecating the
heuristic method for identifying the type of packet
encapsulated in
MPLS.
Perhaps:
Section 2.1.1 of this document includes an analysis of load-
balancing
techniques; based on this, Section 2.1.1.1 introduces a
requirement
that deprecates the use of the heuristic method for
identifying the type
of packet encapsulated in MPLS and recommends using a
dedicated label value for load balancing.
...
Furthermore, this document updates [RFC4928] by deprecating
this
heuristic method.
GIM>> I like the proposed update of the first paragraph. Since
it is followed by two sentences, would "this heuristic method"
reference be clear to a reader? Would keeping that part unchanged be
acceptable?
-->
6) <!-- [rfced] Would you like to alphabetize the list of
abbreviations in Section 1.3
("Abbreviations")? Or do you prefer the current order?
Similarly, would you like to alphabetize the terms in Section 1.2
("Definitions") or keep the current order?
GIM>> Yes, alphabetize them, please.
-->
7) <!-- [rfced] We updated this text as shown below.
Specifically, we moved the
third sentence of the first paragraph to follow the list and
updated "A."
to read "Example A:". Let us know any concerns.
Original:
Figure 1 shows an MPLS packet with Layer 2 header X and a
label stack
Y ending with Label-n. Then, there are three examples of an
MPLS
payload displayed in Figure 2. The complete MPLS packet
thus would
consist of [X Y A], or [X Y B], or [X Y C].
A. The first payload is a bare IP packet, i.e., no PSH.
The PFN in
this case overlaps with the IP version number.
B. The next payload is a bare non-IP packet; again, no
PSH. The PFN
here is the first nibble of the payload, whatever it happens
to be.
C. The last example is an MPLS Payload that starts with a PSH
followed by the embedded packet. Here, the embedded packet
could be
IP or non-IP.
Updated:
Figure 1 shows an MPLS packet with a Layer 2 header X and a
label stack
Y ending with Label-n. Figure 2 displays three examples of an
MPLS payload:
Example A: The first payload is a bare IP packet, i.e., no
PSH. The
PFN in this case overlaps with the IP version number.
Example B: The next payload is a bare non-IP packet; again,
no PSH.
The PFN here is the first nibble of the payload, whatever it
happens to be.
Example C: This example is an MPLS Payload that starts with
a PSH
followed by the embedded packet. Here, the embedded
packet could
be IP or non-IP.
Thus, the complete MPLS packet would consist of [X Y A], [X
Y B], or
[X Y C].
GIM>> Thank you for your updates that improve readability of
the document.
-->
8) <!-- [rfced] For readability, may we update this list as
follows?
Original:
There are four common ways to load balance an MPLS packet:
1. One can use the top label alone.
2. One can do better by using all of the non-SPLs (Special
Purpose
Labels) [RFC7274] in the stack.
3. One can do even better by "divining" the type of
embedded packet,
and using fields from the guessed header. The
ramifications of
using this load-balancing technique are discussed in
detail in
Section 2.1.1.1.
4. One can do best by using either an Entropy Label
[RFC6790] or a
Flow-Aware Transport (FAT) Pseudowire Label [RFC6391] (see
Section 2.1.1.1).
Perhaps:
There are four common ways to load balance an MPLS packet:
1. Use the top label alone.
2. Use all of the non-SPLs (Special Purpose
Labels) [RFC7274] in the stack. This is better than
using the
top label alone.
3. Divine the type of embedded packet
and use fields from the guessed header. The
ramifications of
using this load-balancing technique are discussed in
detail in
Section 2.1.1.1. This way is better than the two ways
above.
4. Use either an Entropy Label [RFC6790] or a
Flow-Aware Transport (FAT) Pseudowire Label [RFC6391] (see
Section 2.1.1.1). This is the best way.
GIM>> I agree with the proposed updates with a suggestion to
maintain quotation marks as "divine".
-->
9) <!-- [rfced] Would including some text to introduce the
numbered list in
Section 2.1.1.1 be helpful? If so, please provide the text.
GIM>> I think that the current text is sufficient but I am open
to any text other authors propose.
-->
10) <!-- [rfced] Would it be helpful to update "Support for" to
"The framework
for" in this sentence?
Original:
Support for MPLS Network Actions (MNAs) is described in
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-fwk] and is an enhancement to the MPLS
architecture.
Perhaps:
The framework for MPLS Network Actions (MNAs) is described
in [RFC9789] and
is an enhancement to the MPLS architecture.
GIM>> I agree with the proposed change.
-->
11) <!-- [rfced] This sentence notes that the PFN value of 0x0
has two different
formats, but the IANA registry in Section 3 lists the value 0x0
three
times. Please review and let us know if any updates are needed.
Original:
This issue is described in section 3.6.1 of [I-D.ietf-mpls-
mna-fwk]
and is further illustrated by the PFN value of 0x0 which has
two
different formats depending on whether the PSH is a pseudowire
control word or a DetNet control word ...
GIM>> Your observation is correct. Value 0x0 is used by three
services that are listed in the IANA registry in Section 3. But two
of these services use four-octet long format, while one - eight-octet
long format. Thus, three entries in the registry but only two formats.
-->
12) <!-- [rfced] How may we clarify "leading to [RFC4928]"?
Original:
It was then discovered that
non-IP packets, misidentified as IP when the heuristic
failed, were
being badly load balanced, leading to [RFC4928].
Perhaps:
It was then discovered that
non-IP packets, misidentified as IP when the heuristic
failed, were
being badly load-balanced, leading to the scenario described
in [RFC4928].
GIM>> Thank you for your creative editing! I agree with the
proposed update.
-->
13) <!-- [rfced] What does "it" refer to here?
Original:
It would assist with the progress toward a simpler, more
coherent
system of MPLS data encapsulation if the use a PSH for non-IP
payloads encapsulated in MPLS was obsoleted.
Perhaps:
If the use a PSH for non-IP
payloads encapsulated in MPLS were obsoleted, this would
assist with
the progress toward a simpler, more coherent
system of MPLS data encapsulation
Or:
Obsoleting the use a PSH for non-IP
payloads encapsulated in MPLS would assist with the progress
toward a simpler, more coherent
system of MPLS data encapsulation.
GIM>> Thank you for proposing two excellent options.I slightly
prefer the second with a minor modification (two options ;-) :
s/the use a PSH/the use of a PSH/ or s/the use a PSH/using a PSH/
-->
14) <!-- [rfced] Please review "to load-balancing MPLS data
flows". Should the
"load balance" be used instead of the "load-balancing"? Or
is the current correct?
Original:
However, before that
can be done, it is important to collect sufficient evidence
that
there are no marketed or deployed implementations using the
heuristic
practice to load-balancing MPLS data flows.
Perhaps:
However, before that
can be done, it is important to collect sufficient evidence
that
there are no marketed or deployed implementations using the
heuristic
practice to load balance MPLS data flows.
GIM>> I think that the current form is acceptable. What do
other authors think?
-->
15) <!-- [rfced] We removed the expansion "Network Service
Header" in Table 1 as
this is expanded previously in the document. If no objections,
we will
ask IANA to update the "Post-Stack First Nibble" registry
accordingly
prior to publication.
Link to registry: https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.iana.org%2Fassignments%2Fpost-stack-first-
nibble&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323920690%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=NE59kFQyMShjMkOEIgC1BVvn0%2BX%2FGHALYGJHSSLgxYk%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/post-stack-first-nibble>
Original:
| NSH | 0x0 | NSH (Network Service Header)
| | | Base Header, payload
Current:
| NSH | 0x0 | NSH Base Header, paylod
GIM>> I agree; your update makes the table easier to read.
-->
16) <!-- [rfced] Abbreviations
a) FYI - We updated the expansion for LSE as follows to align
with the
expansion used in RFCs-to-be 9789 and 9791. Also, "Label Stack
Element" has
not been used in published RFCs.
Original:
Label Stack Element
Updated:
Label Stack Entry
GIM>> Great catch, thank you. I agree.
b) FYI - We have added expansions for the following abbreviations
per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide"). Please review
each
expansion in the document carefully to ensure correctness.
Deterministic Networking (DetNet)
Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS)
Media Access Control (MAC)
GIM>> Thank you for your thorough work with the document. I agree.
-->
17) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion
of the online
Style Guide <https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fstyleguide%2Fpart2%2F%23inclusive_language&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323935176%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=sWmXtEqoJOnM0ja8DqcHx40ca1bDNKf8BONOCNFjUmY%3D&reserved=0
<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.
GIM>> Thank you for checking that. I couldn't find anything
that raises a red flag.
-->
Thank you.
RFC Editor/rv
On May 13, 2025, at 9:19 PM, rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org wrote:
*****IMPORTANT*****
Updated 2025/05/13
RFC Author(s):
--------------
Instructions for Completing AUTH48
Your document has now entered AUTH48. Once it has been
reviewed and
approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC.
If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies
available as listed in the FAQ (https://
eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Ffaq%2F&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323949688%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=RLBjJTE4I4AJ%2FqBg11yB6gwO6rskbrgvz%2Fomjq0TCV8%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/>).
You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties
(e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before
providing
your approval.
Planning your review
---------------------
Please review the following aspects of your document:
* RFC Editor questions
Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor
that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as
follows:
<!-- [rfced] ... -->
These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email.
* Changes submitted by coauthors
Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your
coauthors. We assume that if you do not speak up that you
agree to changes submitted by your coauthors.
* Content
Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot
change once the RFC is published. Please pay particular
attention to:
- IANA considerations updates (if applicable)
- contact information
- references
* Copyright notices and legends
Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in
RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions
(TLP – https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Ftrustee.ietf.org%2Flicense-
info&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323963961%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2BeuH8JhFr%2FtfsIY4PJ9EGoAonZcJ6L0JCJuFwqjmdp0%3D&reserved=0)
<https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info>.
* Semantic markup
Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that
elements of
content are correctly tagged. For example, ensure that
<sourcecode>
and <artwork> are set correctly. See details at
<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fauthors.ietf.org%2Frfcxml-
vocabulary&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323978301%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=y%2BWD2YSgCb8fodIV86eWe9pNxPNkL2Qg%2B%2FoMHtXTWsM%3D&reserved=0
<https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>>.
* Formatted output
Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the
formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML
file, is
reasonable. Please note that the TXT will have formatting
limitations compared to the PDF and HTML.
Submitting changes
------------------
To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’
as all
the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The
parties
include:
* your coauthors
* rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org (the RPC team)
* other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g.,
IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the
responsible ADs, and the document shepherd).
* auth48archive@rfc-editor.org, which is a new archival
mailing list
to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active
discussion
list:
* More info:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fmailarchive.ietf.org%2Farch%2Fmsg%2Fietf-
announce%2Fyb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407323992672%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=sXOq7N0XjYNi933UhG6EaZs21xr08mx00hf70P7vadM%3D&reserved=0
<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc>
* The archive itself:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fmailarchive.ietf.org%2Farch%2Fbrowse%2Fauth48archive%2F&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407324007231%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=nWCeHJyAb323JepZtsTCb8ZTavnGzTk6JTC%2BBox9zhs%3D&reserved=0
<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/>
* Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily
opt out
of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a
sensitive matter).
If needed, please add a note at the top of the message
that you
have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded,
auth48archive@rfc-editor.org will be re-added to the CC
list and
its addition will be noted at the top of the message.
You may submit your changes in one of two ways:
An update to the provided XML file
— OR —
An explicit list of changes in this format
Section # (or indicate Global)
OLD:
old text
NEW:
new text
You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an
explicit
list of changes, as either form is sufficient.
We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes
that seem
beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text,
deletion of text,
and technical changes. Information about stream managers can
be found in
the FAQ. Editorial changes do not require approval from a
stream manager.
Approving for publication
--------------------------
To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email
stating
that you approve this RFC for publication. Please use ‘REPLY
ALL’,
as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval.
Files
-----
The files are available here:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790.xml&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407324024387%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=W2%2FmMJndix8teBEpynxM8PY9lkIe3JEnySi5YBgAZbc%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.xml>
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407324044443%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=t7PBUv3rMmcgLDcmSDORDh2Py%2B%2BPZzvj28TrmeFMB%2Fg%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.html>
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407324059716%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=f0bBTHfTJ3a%2FffwvlOgcKbS5l5frUj7JXfYGHpZ%2B0BI%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.pdf>
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790.txt&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407324074544%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vqfCHxYCx4M7Q4nur5dSKP60V2WuEAyoV3MAVX%2F%2BCJw%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790.txt>
Diff file of the text:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407324089010%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=L6qIiHtm40PaY1Jiv9wjFU6MzVPZyJ2S4bJqm5dI2H0%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-diff.html>
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407324103521%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=nt8ZRBnnvmdIJzPJ6eDPLZefJ7c9QyI8uQ0cgd3mkkY%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-rfcdiff.html> (side by side)
Alt-diff of the text (allows you to more easily view changes
where text has been deleted or moved):
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-alt-
diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407324118010%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=4PwuinPoYSZy%2FbW3v1%2BSSEk2sVhCZm1GPtOHqly9Guk%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-alt-diff.html>
Diff of the XML:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9790-
xmldiff1.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407324132815%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2FaGqOTzbkhRrBDgwFLw0frbS19m5j7a7qK0k0R%2BRBBk%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9790-xmldiff1.html>
Tracking progress
-----------------
The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
editor.org%2Fauth48%2Frfc9790&data=05%7C02%7Cmatthew.bocci%40nokia.com%7C4d4c9e69f91348af67e708dd988229d8%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C638834407324147131%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=LsyyQHXwo9BiHMje%2Ftw33jP16Yn9cv2P2%2Bk4ewEX11A%3D&reserved=0
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9790>
Please let us know if you have any questions.
Thank you for your cooperation,
RFC Editor
--------------------------------------
RFC9790 (draft-ietf-mpls-1stnibble-13)
Title : IANA Registry and Processing Recommendations
for the First Nibble Following a Label Stack
Author(s) : K. Kompella, S. Bryant, M. Bocci, G. Mirsky,
L. Andersson, J. Dong
WG Chair(s) : Tarek Saad, Tony Li, Adrian Farrel
Area Director(s) : Jim Guichard, Ketan Talaulikar, Gunter Van
de Velde
