Hi Suresh, Thank you for your review and for letting us know you did not receive the original AUTH48 mail. We have noted your approval on the AUTH48 page <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9812> and will continue with publication once approvals and updates to the IANA registry titles are complete.
Thank you, RFC Editor/sg > On Jun 27, 2025, at 12:59 PM, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krish...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi Sandy, > Thanks for your work on this. I also checked and, like Brian, have not > received the original mail. I have read the latest version and it looks good. > Consider my approval complete. > > Regards > Suresh > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 12:00 PM Sandy Ginoza <sgin...@staff.rfc-editor.org> > wrote: > Hi Brian, > > Thank you for your review. We have updated the document as described below > and posted the updated files here: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812.xml > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812.txt > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812.pdf > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812.html > > AUTH48 diffs: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812-auth48diff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by > side) > > Comprehensive diffs: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812-diff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812-rfcdiff.html (side by side) > > > A few notes: > > - We are unsure why the initial AUTH48 email was not received. Thank you for > letting us know; we will track whether there are ongoing issues. > > - Regarding your name, if you prefer "B. E. Carpenter”, we are happy to > update this document and this form moving forward. Please let us know your > preference. > > - Regarding "I assume the IANA and RFC Editor actions will be done just > before the actual publication.” — IANA has already updated the registration > procedure. We are working with IANA in the background to coordinate the > updates to the registry titles. I expect you prefer to delay publication of > this RFC until the titles have been updated so the document can be updated > accordingly. Please let me know if this assumption is incorrect. > > Thanks, > RFC Editor/sg > > > > On Jun 26, 2025, at 2:02 PM, Brian E Carpenter > > <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I have read the various versions and checked the diffs, and for me this is > > all good. > > (I assume the IANA and RFC Editor actions will be done just before the > > actual publication.) > > > > Other answers in line below. > > > > Thanks much > > Brian Carpenter > > > > On 27-Jun-25 06:21, Sandy Ginoza wrote: > >> Greetings authors, > >> Please note that we await your review of RFC-to-be 9812. Please let us > >> know how you would like to address the items below. > >> Thank you, > >> RFC Editor/sg > >>> On Jun 18, 2025, at 4:38 PM, rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org wrote: > >>> > >>> Authors, > >>> > >>> While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary) > >>> the following questions, which are also in the XML file. > >>> > >>> 1) <!--[rfced] This document has been assigned a new BCP number. However, > >>> it is unclear whether this document should be grouped with an existing > >>> BCP. > >>> Please review the list of BCPs closely and let us know if the newly > >>> assigned BCP number is correct or if it should be added to an existing > >>> BCP. > >>> > >>> See the complete list of BCPs here: > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcps > >>> --> > > > > There is a slight relationship with BCP 153 but I think a new BCP number > > is appropriate. > > > >>> > >>> > >>> 2) <!-- [rfced] Brian, we have updated the document header as shown below > >>> to match what appears in the header of the RFCs you've authored. Please > >>> let us know if you prefer otherwise. > >>> > >>> Original: B. E. Carpenter > >>> Current: B. Carpenter > >>> --> > > > > That's fine. A bit too late to change this. > > > >>> > >>> > >>> 3) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear in > >>> the title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. --> > >>> > >>> > >>> 4) <!-- [rfced] Regarding the RFC Editor Considerations section, we would > >>> like to avoid setting precedent that stream changes need to be documented > >>> in RFCs. We intend to update the stream metadata for RFC 1881 as > >>> requested > >>> (from "Legacy" to "IETF") and remove 'RFC Editor Considerations' (Section > >>> 3) from this document, as it's not necessary to capture the metadata > >>> correction within the RFC. Please let us know if you have any strong > >>> objections. > > > > No objection from me. It's the result that counts. > > > >>> > >>> 3. RFC Editor Considerations > >>> > >>> The RFC Editor is requested to update the "Stream" information for > >>> [RFC1881] to "IETF" in place of "Legacy". > >>> --> > >>> > >>> > >>> 5) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of the > >>> online Style Guide > >>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/#inclusive_language> > >>> and let us know if any changes are needed. Updates of this nature > >>> typically result in more precise language, which is helpful for readers. > >>> > >>> Note that our script did not flag any words in particular, but this should > >>> still be reviewed as a best practice. > >>> --> > > > > I see nothing to change. > > > >>> > >>> > >>> Thank you. > >>> > >>> RFC Editor > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Jun 18, 2025, at 4:36 PM, rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org wrote: > >>> > >>> *****IMPORTANT***** > >>> > >>> Updated 2025/06/18 > >>> > >>> 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://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://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://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://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc > >>> > >>> * The archive itself: > >>> 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://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812.xml > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812.html > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812.pdf > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812.txt > >>> > >>> Diff file of the text: > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812-diff.html > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812-rfcdiff.html (side by side) > >>> > >>> Diff of the XML: > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9812-xmldiff1.html > >>> > >>> > >>> Tracking progress > >>> ----------------- > >>> > >>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9812 > >>> > >>> Please let us know if you have any questions. > >>> > >>> Thank you for your cooperation, > >>> > >>> RFC Editor > >>> > >>> -------------------------------------- > >>> RFC 9812 (draft-ietf-6man-addr-assign-05) > >>> > >>> Title : Clarification of IPv6 Address Allocation Policy > >>> Author(s) : B. Carpenter, S. Krishnan, D. Farmer > >>> 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
