Hi Ron, Thanks for the quick reply! We have marked your approval on the AUTH48 status page for this document (https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9805).
Thank you for your attention and guidance during the AUTH48 process. We will begin to prepare this document for the publication at this time. Sincerely, RFC Editor/rv > On Jun 17, 2025, at 10:49 AM, Ron Bonica <rbon...@juniper.net> wrote: > > I approve > > Thanks for the careful reading! > > Ron > > Juniper Business Use Only > From: Rebecca VanRheenen <rvanrhee...@staff.rfc-editor.org> > Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2025 10:47 AM > To: Ron Bonica <rbon...@juniper.net> > Cc: ek.i...@gmail.com <ek.i...@gmail.com>; 6man-...@ietf.org > <6man-...@ietf.org>; RFC Editor <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org>; > 6man-cha...@ietf.org <6man-cha...@ietf.org>; bob.hin...@gmail.com > <bob.hin...@gmail.com>; auth48archive@rfc-editor.org > <auth48archive@rfc-editor.org> > Subject: Re: [AD] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9805 > <draft-ietf-6man-deprecate-router-alert-13> for your review > [External Email. Be cautious of content] > > > Hi Ron, > > Thank you for the reply! We have updated to use "IPv6 Router Alert option”. > All of our questions have now been addressed. > > Please let us know if you approve of the document in its current form. After > we receive your approval, we will begin to prepare the document for > publication. > > — FILES (please refresh) — > > Updated XML file: > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805.xml__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!B9X1ZSRTVJLjwp79jJ-6FyaGMQzzMv_1gwfMWQFJleReA3f_VeSEE9pHHOV-0JByw-zVwbXbUOxKiTKtGSrG4tBoSXbrB2A$ > > Updated output files: > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!B9X1ZSRTVJLjwp79jJ-6FyaGMQzzMv_1gwfMWQFJleReA3f_VeSEE9pHHOV-0JByw-zVwbXbUOxKiTKtGSrG4tBoCIzp3iY$ > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805.pdf__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!B9X1ZSRTVJLjwp79jJ-6FyaGMQzzMv_1gwfMWQFJleReA3f_VeSEE9pHHOV-0JByw-zVwbXbUOxKiTKtGSrG4tBo1q-bjio$ > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!B9X1ZSRTVJLjwp79jJ-6FyaGMQzzMv_1gwfMWQFJleReA3f_VeSEE9pHHOV-0JByw-zVwbXbUOxKiTKtGSrG4tBoM4mD7W4$ > > Diff file showing all changes made during AUTH48: > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-auth48diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!B9X1ZSRTVJLjwp79jJ-6FyaGMQzzMv_1gwfMWQFJleReA3f_VeSEE9pHHOV-0JByw-zVwbXbUOxKiTKtGSrG4tBoocXNpF4$ > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-auth48rfcdiff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!B9X1ZSRTVJLjwp79jJ-6FyaGMQzzMv_1gwfMWQFJleReA3f_VeSEE9pHHOV-0JByw-zVwbXbUOxKiTKtGSrG4tBo2iTaIYQ$ > (side by side) > > Diff files showing all changes: > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!B9X1ZSRTVJLjwp79jJ-6FyaGMQzzMv_1gwfMWQFJleReA3f_VeSEE9pHHOV-0JByw-zVwbXbUOxKiTKtGSrG4tBosU7JQU8$ > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-rfcdiff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!B9X1ZSRTVJLjwp79jJ-6FyaGMQzzMv_1gwfMWQFJleReA3f_VeSEE9pHHOV-0JByw-zVwbXbUOxKiTKtGSrG4tBo9wwqMYU$ > (side by side) > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-alt-diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!B9X1ZSRTVJLjwp79jJ-6FyaGMQzzMv_1gwfMWQFJleReA3f_VeSEE9pHHOV-0JByw-zVwbXbUOxKiTKtGSrG4tBoROBRguc$ > (diff showing changes where text is moved or deleted) > > For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9805__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!B9X1ZSRTVJLjwp79jJ-6FyaGMQzzMv_1gwfMWQFJleReA3f_VeSEE9pHHOV-0JByw-zVwbXbUOxKiTKtGSrG4tBo72sljxo$ > > Best regards, > RFC Editor/rv > > > > > On Jun 15, 2025, at 9:15 PM, Ron Bonica <rbon...@juniper.net> wrote: > > > > Inline...... > > > > > > Juniper Business Use Only > > From: Rebecca VanRheenen <rvanrhee...@staff.rfc-editor.org> > > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2025 7:29 PM > > To: Ron Bonica <rbon...@juniper.net>; ek.i...@gmail.com<ek.i...@gmail.com>; > > 6man-...@ietf.org <6man-...@ietf.org> > > Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org>; 6man-cha...@ietf.org > > <6man-cha...@ietf.org>; bob.hin...@gmail.com <bob.hin...@gmail.com>; > > auth48archive@rfc-editor.org <auth48archive@rfc-editor.org> > > Subject: [AD] Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9805 > > <draft-ietf-6man-deprecate-router-alert-13> for your review > > > > [External Email. Be cautious of content] > > > > > > Hi Ron and Erik*, > > > > *Erik, as AD, please review and approve the change from “may” to “MAY” in > > the third sentence of Section 4 (to align with first sentence). The change > > is best viewed in this diff file: > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-auth48diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G9f5eMrgpWuzcDgFdTkkdBmb_tziTDcbcwttombPkBlVSFbWs0R2ZsuN5OdNO26ZIUg2q43ov3ftbpF4iUvdxrAqCRhZFt4$ > > . > > > > Ron, thank you for responding to our questions so quickly! We have updated > > the document accordingly and have one followup question: > > > > >> a) We note inconsistencies in the terms listed below. We chose the > > >> latter form > > >> (i.e., capitalized "Option"). Please let us know if you prefer > > >> differently. > > >> > > >> Router Alert option > > >> Router Alert Option > > >> Note: The capitalized form with "Option" is used in RFCs 6398, 7506, > > >> and 9673 (and is > > >> more common in this document); the lowercase form with "option" is > > >> used in RFCs 8504 > > >> and 9288. > > > > > > RB> Please standardize on Router Alert option. > > > > > > > > >> b) We see the following forms used in the document. Are any updates > > >> needed, or > > >> are these okay as is? > > >> > > >> Router Alert Option > > >> IP Router Alert Option > > >> IPv6 Router Alert Option > > > > > > RB> Please standardize on IPv6 Router Alert Option, except for the one > > > case of IP Router Alert Option. That is a direct quote from > > > another RFC. > > > > We’d like to clarify how to update based on your replies to the two > > questions above. > > > > Should instances of the following: > > Router Alert Option > > and > > IPv6 Router Alert Option > > > > Be updated to (with “IPv6” and lowercase “option”): > > IPv6 Router Alert option > > > > RB> Yes > > > > (We will not make changes to the single instance of "IP Router Alert > > Option” per your request.) > > > > RB> Perfect > > > > > > > > > > — FILES (please refresh) — > > > > Updated XML file: > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805.xml__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G9f5eMrgpWuzcDgFdTkkdBmb_tziTDcbcwttombPkBlVSFbWs0R2ZsuN5OdNO26ZIUg2q43ov3ftbpF4iUvdxrAqTnU7Rcs$ > > > > Updated output files: > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G9f5eMrgpWuzcDgFdTkkdBmb_tziTDcbcwttombPkBlVSFbWs0R2ZsuN5OdNO26ZIUg2q43ov3ftbpF4iUvdxrAqKbcy4Pc$ > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805.pdf__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G9f5eMrgpWuzcDgFdTkkdBmb_tziTDcbcwttombPkBlVSFbWs0R2ZsuN5OdNO26ZIUg2q43ov3ftbpF4iUvdxrAqP9FjQ7I$ > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G9f5eMrgpWuzcDgFdTkkdBmb_tziTDcbcwttombPkBlVSFbWs0R2ZsuN5OdNO26ZIUg2q43ov3ftbpF4iUvdxrAqCLxFKCg$ > > > > Diff file showing all changes made during AUTH48: > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-auth48diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G9f5eMrgpWuzcDgFdTkkdBmb_tziTDcbcwttombPkBlVSFbWs0R2ZsuN5OdNO26ZIUg2q43ov3ftbpF4iUvdxrAqCRhZFt4$ > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-auth48rfcdiff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G9f5eMrgpWuzcDgFdTkkdBmb_tziTDcbcwttombPkBlVSFbWs0R2ZsuN5OdNO26ZIUg2q43ov3ftbpF4iUvdxrAqGJvULuU$ > > (side by side) > > > > Diff files showing all changes: > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G9f5eMrgpWuzcDgFdTkkdBmb_tziTDcbcwttombPkBlVSFbWs0R2ZsuN5OdNO26ZIUg2q43ov3ftbpF4iUvdxrAqBxW2AfU$ > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-rfcdiff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G9f5eMrgpWuzcDgFdTkkdBmb_tziTDcbcwttombPkBlVSFbWs0R2ZsuN5OdNO26ZIUg2q43ov3ftbpF4iUvdxrAqaCEx0tA$ > > (side by side) > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-alt-diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G9f5eMrgpWuzcDgFdTkkdBmb_tziTDcbcwttombPkBlVSFbWs0R2ZsuN5OdNO26ZIUg2q43ov3ftbpF4iUvdxrAq5e1TsYw$ > > (diff showing changes where text is moved or deleted) > > > > For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9805__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!G9f5eMrgpWuzcDgFdTkkdBmb_tziTDcbcwttombPkBlVSFbWs0R2ZsuN5OdNO26ZIUg2q43ov3ftbpF4iUvdxrAqDCx_7I8$ > > > > Thank you, > > > > RFC Editor/rv > > > > > > > > > On Jun 13, 2025, at 7:42 AM, Ron Bonica > > > <rbonica=40juniper....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > > > > > Responses inline....... RB> > > > > > > Once the changes mentioned in this email are applied, I approve the > > > document for publication. > > > > > > > > > Ron > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Juniper Business Use Only > > > From: rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org> > > > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2025 1:38 AM > > > To: Ron Bonica <rbon...@juniper.net> > > > Cc: rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org>; > > > 6man-...@ietf.org <6man-...@ietf.org>; 6man-cha...@ietf.org > > > <6man-cha...@ietf.org>; bob.hin...@gmail.com<bob.hin...@gmail.com>; > > > ek.i...@gmail.com<ek.i...@gmail.com>; auth48archive@rfc-editor.org > > > <auth48archive@rfc-editor.org> > > > Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9805 > > > <draft-ietf-6man-deprecate-router-alert-13> for your review > > > > > > [External Email. Be cautious of content] > > > > > > > > > Ron, > > > > > > While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as > > > necessary) the following questions, which are also in the XML file. > > > > > > > > > 1) <!-- [rfced] May we update "between IP Router Alert packets of > > > interest and > > > unwanted IP Router Alerts" as follows to improve readability? > > > > > > Original: > > > In a nutshell, the IP Router Alert Option does > > > not provide a universal mechanism to accurately and reliably > > > distinguish between IP Router Alert packets of interest and unwanted > > > IP Router Alerts. > > > > > > Perhaps: > > > In a nutshell, the IP Router Alert Option does > > > not provide a universal mechanism to accurately and reliably > > > distinguish between IP Router Alert packets that are of interest > > > and those that are unwanted. > > > --> > > > > > > RB> Please leave this one alone. It is a direct quote from RFC 6398 > > > > > > 2) <!-- [rfced] Please confirm that "may" in last sentence is correct. Or > > > should it > > > be "MAY" to correspond with "MAY" in the first sentence? > > > > > > RB> It should be MAY. Good catch! > > > > > > Original: > > > Protocols > > > that use the Router Alert Option MAY continue to do so, even in > > > future versions. However, new protocols that are standardized in the > > > future MUST NOT use the Router Alert Option. Appendix A contains an > > > exhaustive list of protocols that may continue to use the Router > > > Alert Option. > > > > > > Perhaps: > > > Protocols > > > that use the Router Alert Option MAY continue to do so, even in > > > future versions. However, new protocols that are standardized in the > > > future MUST NOT use the Router Alert Option. Appendix A contains an > > > exhaustive list of protocols that MAY continue to use the Router > > > Alert Option. > > > --> > > > > > > > > > 3) <!-- [rfced] Informative reference RFC 3810 has been obsoleted by > > > RFC 9777. We recommend replacing RFC 3810 with RFC 9777. However, if RFC > > > 3810 must be referenced, we suggest mentioning RFC 9777 (e.g., RFC 3810 > > > has > > > been obsoleted by RFC 9777). See Section 4.8.6 in the RFC Style Guide > > > (RFC 7322). > > > --> > > > > > > RB> Please update the reference. > > > > > > 4) <!-- [rfced] Should "router alert" in this text in Table 1 be updated > > > to > > > "Router Alert Option"? > > > > > > RB> Yes! Again, good catch > > > > > > Original: > > > MPLS PING (Use of router alert deprecated) > > > > > > Perhaps: > > > MPLS Ping (Use of Router Alert Option is deprecated) > > > --> > > > > > > > > > 5) <!-- [rfced] Please review whether the note in Section 3 > > > should be in the <aside> element. It is defined as "a container for > > > content that is semantically less important or tangential to the > > > content that surrounds it" > > > (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://authors.ietf.org/en/rfcxml-vocabulary*aside__;Iw!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlw1jVsPaN$ > > > ). > > > > > > RB> Yes, it is an <aside>. I never know that such an XML feature existed! > > > > > > Original: > > > NOTE: Many routers maintain separation between forwarding and control > > > plane hardware. The forwarding plane is implemented on high- > > > performance Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASIC) and > > > Network Processors (NP), while the control plane is implemented on > > > general-purpose processors. Given this difference, the control plane > > > is more susceptible to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) attack than the > > > forwarding plane. > > > --> > > > > > > > > > 6) <!-- [rfced] Terminology > > > > > > a) We note inconsistencies in the terms listed below. We chose the latter > > > form > > > (i.e., capitalized "Option"). Please let us know if you prefer > > > differently. > > > > > > Router Alert option > > > Router Alert Option > > > Note: The capitalized form with "Option" is used in RFCs 6398, 7506, > > > and 9673 (and is > > > more common in this document); the lowercase form with "option" is > > > used in RFCs 8504 > > > and 9288. > > > > > > > > > RB> Please standardize on Router Alert option. > > > > > > > > > b) We see the following forms used in the document. Are any updates > > > needed, or > > > are these okay as is? > > > > > > Router Alert Option > > > IP Router Alert Option > > > IPv6 Router Alert Option > > > > > > RB> Please standardize on IPv6 Router Alert Option, except for the one > > > case of IP Router Alert Option. That is a direct quote from > > > another RFC. > > > > > > Hop-by-Hop Options header > > > IPv6 Hop-by-Hop Options header > > > > > > RB> Please standardize on Hop-by-Hop Options Header > > > > > > > > > > > > c) Should "Hop-by-Hop options" here be updated to "Hop-by-Hop Options > > > header"? > > > > > > Original: > > > One approach would be > > > to deprecate the Router Alert option, because current usage beyond > > > the local network appears to be limited, and packets containing Hop- > > > by-Hop options are frequently dropped. > > > > > > Perhaps: > > > One approach would be > > > to deprecate the Router Alert Option, because current usage beyond > > > the local network appears to be limited and packets containing the Hop- > > > by-Hop Options header are frequently dropped. > > > > > > RB> Please leave this one alone. It is a direct quote from > > > > > > > > > d) We updated "PING" to "Ping" per usage in RFCs 7506, 8029, and 9570. > > > > > > RB> Good catch > > > > > > > > > e) May we update "INTSERV" to either "Intserv" (RFCs 9522, 9064, and > > > 7417) or > > > "IntServ" (RFCs 9049 and 6007), both of which are more common in the RFC > > > Series? > > > --> > > > > > > RB> Please do > > > > > > > > > > > > 7) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have added expansions for the following > > > abbreviation(s) > > > per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide"). Please review each > > > expansion in the document carefully to ensure correctness. > > > > > > Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) > > > --> > > > > > > RB> Good catch! > > > > > > 8) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of the > > > online > > > Style Guide > > > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/*inclusive_language__;Iw!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlw3AtDTFD$ > > > > > > > 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. > > > --> > > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > RFC Editor/rv > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 12, 2025, at 10:31 PM, rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org wrote: > > > > > > *****IMPORTANT***** > > > > > > Updated 2025/06/12 > > > > > > 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0XlwwV_tTqH$ > > > ). > > > > > > 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0XlwyPdvjPl$ > > > ). > > > > > > * 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlw3kdsNv1$ > > > >. > > > > > > * 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlw8E4OC4P$ > > > > > > * The archive itself: > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlw49zdemR$ > > > > > > * 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805.xml__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlw1ntkWnN$ > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlwwm6sqB_$ > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805.pdf__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlw4gy4kLS$ > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlw5kz983J$ > > > > > > Diff file of the text: > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0XlwzIa6zn_$ > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-rfcdiff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlwx9DIeem$ > > > (side by side) > > > > > > Alt-diff of the text (allows you to more easily view changes > > > where text has been deleted or moved): > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-alt-diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlw4F6_iMu$ > > > > > > Diff of the XML: > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9805-xmldiff1.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlw5LG9FPU$ > > > > > > > > > Tracking progress > > > ----------------- > > > > > > The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9805__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!E1ZXl_420vkIhm0Jn6eV9pDuF893K_6mF_2cRkP8AcbBmSXpudAshcsEIv6ky-Zd9CkylA4ezj-wh0Xlw4RJIEjK$ > > > > > > Please let us know if you have any questions. > > > > > > Thank you for your cooperation, > > > > > > RFC Editor > > > > > > -------------------------------------- > > > RFC9805 (draft-ietf-6man-deprecate-router-alert-13) > > > > > > Title : Deprecation Of The IPv6 Router Alert Option For New > > > Protocols > > > Author(s) : R. Bonica > > > WG Chair(s) : Bob Hinden, Jen Linkova > > > > > > Area Director(s) : Erik Kline, Éric Vyncke -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
