I'm approving the doc On Thu, Jul 24, 2025, 14:53 Mishra, Sanjay <sanjay.mis...@verizon.com> wrote:
> +Nir Sopher <nirsop...@gmail.com> > > Hi all - I'm adding Nir on his GMAIL email as he may not have seen his > n...@apache.org email that is on the draft. > > @Nir Sopher <nirsop...@gmail.com> Please see the email thread and respond > at your earliest convenience. > > Thank you > Sanjay > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 10:48 PM Sarah Tarrant < > starr...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: > >> Hi Ben, >> >> Thank you for your reply. We have marked your approval on the AUTH48 >> status page for this document (see >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_auth48_rfc9808&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=ky-2SzhC7R9rMG22MIJkhIoFzkJ7Hx4DIjCOmy2EnTg&e= >> ). >> >> We will await approvals from each of the parties listed at the AUTH48 >> status page prior to moving this document forward in the publication >> process. >> >> Thank you, >> RFC Editor/st >> >> > On Jul 21, 2025, at 2:04 PM, Ben Rosenblum <b...@rosenblum.dev> wrote: >> > >> > I approve the document. Thank you, Sarah! >> > >> > Ben >> > >> > On 7/21/2025 9:43 AM, Sarah Tarrant wrote: >> >> Hi Andrew, >> >> Thank you for your reply. We have marked your approval on the AUTH48 >> status page for this document (see >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_auth48_rfc9808&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=ky-2SzhC7R9rMG22MIJkhIoFzkJ7Hx4DIjCOmy2EnTg&e= >> ). >> >> We will await approvals from each of the parties listed at the AUTH48 >> status page prior to moving this document forward in the publication >> process. >> >> Thank you, >> >> RFC Editor/st >> >>> On Jul 18, 2025, at 12:38 PM, and...@andrewnryan.com wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Sarah, >> >>> Once again, thank you so much for working with us on this. I have >> reviewed the document and approve. >> >>> >> >>> Andrew Ryan >> >>> >> >>> On 7/18/2025 1:08 PM, Sarah Tarrant wrote: >> >>>> Hi Andrew, >> >>>> >> >>>> Thank you for your reply. We have updated the document accordingly >> and have no further questions. >> >>>> >> >>>> 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. >> >>>> >> >>>> The updated files have been posted here (please refresh): >> >>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808.txt&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=Yy_n0pjdcbyGINdqqo78xahPXlhiGNc2si_jupQ_w_0&e= >> >>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808.pdf&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=yCLRH9lrO8ySKY0GfiS7GPyMb39diJNmsvVU_qH2S8c&e= >> >>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=MrtwWOKVtBRwSaOMJqxS0vX3tJA4cFeNebooaIei2lI&e= >> >>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808.xml&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=R7rJB5-T939fIuGVlQe9L5XrsjXCmvLZIBkL5B4zByI&e= >> >>>> >> >>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): >> >>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808-2Ddiff.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=v7AK0d5qcf1xoOGKOWoHvEhHPHGoRwbQb01KEaf4hmI&e= >> (comprehensive diff) >> >>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808-2Dauth48diff.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=VKQj14cL9sepdnmeFVTiKvxLuF1gW7mgmgZd8FgG4wo&e= >> (AUTH48 changes only) >> >>>> >> >>>> Note that it may be necessary for you to refresh your browser to >> view the most recent version. >> >>>> >> >>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >> >>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_auth48_rfc9808&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=ky-2SzhC7R9rMG22MIJkhIoFzkJ7Hx4DIjCOmy2EnTg&e= >> >>>> >> >>>> Thank you, >> >>>> RFC Editor/st >> >>>> >> >>>>> On Jul 18, 2025, at 11:55 AM, and...@andrewnryan.com wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Sarah, >> >>>>> I am glad that the format was easy. Please see answers inline. >> Thank you very much for your collaboration on this, it is greatly >> appreciated. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Andrew Ryan >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On 7/18/2025 12:26 PM, Sarah Tarrant wrote: >> >>>>>> Hi Andrew, Ben, and Nir, >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Andrew - Thank you for your reply and updated XML file. Sending an >> updated XML really speeds up the turnaround during AUTH48, especially with >> these more significant terminology updates. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> We have a few followup questions/comments: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> A) Regarding: >> >>>>>>>> 6) <!-- [rfced] We note that the following reference entries are >> not >> >>>>>>>> cited anywhere in the document. These entries will be removed >> >>>>>>>> prior to publication, unless you would like to let us know where >> >>>>>>>> they may be added in the text. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> [OC-CII] Ryan, A., Ed., Rosenblum, B., Goldstein, G., >> Roskin, R., >> >>>>>>>> and G. Bichot, "Open Caching Capacity Insights - >> >>>>>>>> Functional Specification (Placeholder before >> >>>>>>>> publication)", < >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.svta.org_document_open-2D&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=qcJvZoqBw-LRAayH0sGqWgMdvYE5Q-KkKjtpe-WzVkM&e= >> >>>>>>>> caching-capacity-interface/>. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> [OC-RR] Finkelman, O., Ed., Hofmann, J., Klein, E., Mishra, >> S., >> >>>>>>>> Ma, K., Sahar, D., and B. Zurat, "Open Caching >> Request >> >>>>>>>> Routing - Functional Specification", Version 1.1, 4 >> >>>>>>>> October 2019, < >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.svta.org_product_open-2Dcache-2D&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=3bJrpgTW4v3Hy1yHCQjtqSiB7fYyWqXSQ3sc2koTq-E&e= >> >>>>>>>> request-routing-functional-specification/>. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> [OCWG] "Open Caching Home Page", < >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__opencaching.svta.org_&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=gMxEpeLepdyiTUVETw0ntKT_OKiZiIBDT2ZCPpbmYNI&e= >> >. >> >>>>>>>> --> >> >>>>>>> AR: Perhaps we should reference these documents in the >> introduction, to highlight that >> >>>>>>> these are related. >> >>>>>>> BR - I'm fine with removing the references >> >>>>>> There appears to be conflicting guidance from Andrew and Ben for >> this. Please confer and let us know how we may update. >> >>>>> Apologies for not clarifying/updating the PDF to reflect the >> outcome: I am AR in this sense, and I agree with BR (Ben) about removing >> the non-cited references. >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> B) Regarding: >> >>>>>>>> 10) <!-- [rfced] Please review whether any of the notes in this >> document >> >>>>>>>> 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.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__authors.ietf.org_en_rfcxml-2Dvocabulary-23aside&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=Hi5ORHYUp6kBRh6540mzqlkAcPoHj54_V6XCrJlpklI&e= >> ). >> >>>>>>>> --> >> >>>>>>> AR: this suggestion is unclear to me >> >>>>>> Apologies for the lack of clarity. We typically ask this when we >> see text led by "Note:" or "Note that", which would indent the text a bit. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> For this document, we see "Note:" in Section 2. Would you like us >> to format with the aside element? >> >>>>> Thank you for the clarification. This seems like a good formatting >> suggestion, can we please utilize the aside element for this Note? >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> The updated files have been posted here (please refresh): >> >>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808.txt&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=Yy_n0pjdcbyGINdqqo78xahPXlhiGNc2si_jupQ_w_0&e= >> >>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808.pdf&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=yCLRH9lrO8ySKY0GfiS7GPyMb39diJNmsvVU_qH2S8c&e= >> >>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=MrtwWOKVtBRwSaOMJqxS0vX3tJA4cFeNebooaIei2lI&e= >> >>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808.xml&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=R7rJB5-T939fIuGVlQe9L5XrsjXCmvLZIBkL5B4zByI&e= >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): >> >>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808-2Ddiff.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=v7AK0d5qcf1xoOGKOWoHvEhHPHGoRwbQb01KEaf4hmI&e= >> (comprehensive diff) >> >>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808-2Dauth48diff.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=VKQj14cL9sepdnmeFVTiKvxLuF1gW7mgmgZd8FgG4wo&e= >> (AUTH48 changes only) >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Note that it may be necessary for you to refresh your browser to >> view the most recent version. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >> >>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_auth48_rfc9808&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=ky-2SzhC7R9rMG22MIJkhIoFzkJ7Hx4DIjCOmy2EnTg&e= >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Thank you, >> >>>>>> RFC Editor/st >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Jul 18, 2025, at 9:53 AM, and...@andrewnryan.com wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Greetings, >> >>>>>>> We reviewed the feedback you supplied and have >> considered/incorporated them. Please find an XML document with changes and >> approval, along with a PDF document which outlines the notes on the >> feedback. Please let me know if this is acceptable and if there are any >> additional things I can do to facilitate. Thank you >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Andrew Ryan >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On 7/3/2025 9:51 AM, Sarah Tarrant wrote: >> >>>>>>>> Hi Andrew, >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> I'll be on the lookout for your email! >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Thank you, >> >>>>>>>> RFC Editor/st >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> On Jul 3, 2025, at 8:47 AM, Andrew Ryan <and...@andrewnryan.com> >> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> Sarah, >> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for the followup. We are currently reviewing the >> questions and should have feedback soon. Thank you again. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> Andrew Ryan >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 3, 2025 at 9:17 AM Sarah Tarrant < >> starr...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> Authors, >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> This is a friendly reminder that we await answers to the >> questions below and your review of the document before continuing with the >> publication process. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> Thank you, >> >>>>>>>>> RFC Editor/st >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 2025, at 5:13 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] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that >> appear in >> >>>>>>>>>> the title) for use on >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_search&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=mRoLm4BB421vOCnkM7E4H8hLhE1JU-53kn5qvYP54rE&e= >> . --> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 2) <!-- [rfced] Do the extensions define or does this >> specification define "a set >> >>>>>>>>>> of additional Capability Objects..."? >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Current: >> >>>>>>>>>> The Content Delivery Network Interconnection (CDNI) Capacity >> >>>>>>>>>> Capability Advertisement Extensions define a set of >> additional >> >>>>>>>>>> Capability Objects that provide information about current >> downstream >> >>>>>>>>>> CDN (dCDN) utilization and specified usage limits to the >> delegating >> >>>>>>>>>> upstream CDN (uCDN) in order to inform traffic delegation >> decisions. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps: >> >>>>>>>>>> This specification defines a set of additional >> >>>>>>>>>> Capability Objects that provide information about current >> downstream >> >>>>>>>>>> CDN (dCDN) utilization and specified usage limits to the >> delegating >> >>>>>>>>>> upstream CDN (uCDN) in order to inform traffic delegation >> decisions. >> >>>>>>>>>> --> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 3) <!--[rfced] There are several lists for properties >> throughout the >> >>>>>>>>>> document. If the "Type" and "Mandatory-to-Specify" fields only >> >>>>>>>>>> contain one word and a period, may we remove the period? We >> note >> >>>>>>>>>> that this document follows the formatting style in RFC 8008; >> >>>>>>>>>> however, our current practice is to remove the punctuation if a >> >>>>>>>>>> description only contains one word (see similar examples in >> RFCs >> >>>>>>>>>> 9538 and 9677). Please let us know your preference. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> One example >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Current: >> >>>>>>>>>> Property: type >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Description: A valid telemetry source type (see Section >> 2.1.1.1). >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Type: String. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Mandatory-to-Specify: Yes. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps: >> >>>>>>>>>> Property: type >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Description: A valid telemetry source type (see Section >> 2.1.1.1). >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Type: String >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Mandatory-to-Specify: Yes >> >>>>>>>>>> --> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 4) <!--[rfced] For consistency, should "Telemetry Capability" >> be updated >> >>>>>>>>>> as "the Telemetry Capability Object" in the following sentence? >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Original: >> >>>>>>>>>> The following shows an example of a Telemetry Capability >> >>>>>>>>>> including two metrics for a source, that is scoped to >> >>>>>>>>>> a footprint. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps: >> >>>>>>>>>> The following shows an example of a Telemetry Capability >> Object, >> >>>>>>>>>> including two metrics for a source, that is scoped to >> >>>>>>>>>> a footprint. >> >>>>>>>>>> --> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 5) <!--[rfced] We note that Table 1 includes a description of >> the >> >>>>>>>>>> "generic" source type, whereas Table 4 and the IANA registry do >> >>>>>>>>>> not. Should the description be added to Table 4 and the IANA >> >>>>>>>>>> registry? In Section 2.1.1.1, should Table 1 be replaced with a >> >>>>>>>>>> link to Table 4 to avoid duplication? >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Current (Section 2.1.1.1): >> >>>>>>>>>> At the time of this writing, the registry of valid Telemetry >> Source >> >>>>>>>>>> Object types is limited to a single type: Generic (see >> >>>>>>>>>> Section 3.2.1). >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps A: >> >>>>>>>>>> At the time of this writing, the registry of valid Telemetry >> Source >> >>>>>>>>>> Types is limited to a single type: generic (see Table 4 in >> Section 3.2.1). >> >>>>>>>>>> or >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps B: >> >>>>>>>>>> At the time of this writing, the "CDNI Telemetry Source >> Types" registry >> >>>>>>>>>> is limited to a single type: generic (see Table 4 in Section >> 3.2.1). >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> ... >> >>>>>>>>>> Current (Section 3.2): >> >>>>>>>>>> +=============+===========+ >> >>>>>>>>>> | Source Type | Reference | >> >>>>>>>>>> +=============+===========+ >> >>>>>>>>>> | generic | RFC 9808 | >> >>>>>>>>>> +=============+===========+ >> >>>>>>>>>> Table 4 >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> +=============+=======================================+===========+ >> >>>>>>>>>> | Source Type | Description | >> Reference | >> >>>>>>>>>> >> +=============+=======================================+===========+ >> >>>>>>>>>> | generic | An object that allows for | RFC >> 9808 | >> >>>>>>>>>> | | advertisement of generic data sources | >> | >> >>>>>>>>>> >> +=============+=======================================+===========+ >> >>>>>>>>>> Table 4 >> >>>>>>>>>> --> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 6) <!-- [rfced] We note that the following reference entries >> are not >> >>>>>>>>>> cited anywhere in the document. These entries will be removed >> >>>>>>>>>> prior to publication, unless you would like to let us know >> where >> >>>>>>>>>> they may be added in the text. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> [OC-CII] Ryan, A., Ed., Rosenblum, B., Goldstein, G., >> Roskin, R., >> >>>>>>>>>> and G. Bichot, "Open Caching Capacity Insights - >> >>>>>>>>>> Functional Specification (Placeholder before >> >>>>>>>>>> publication)", < >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.svta.org_document_open-2D&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=qcJvZoqBw-LRAayH0sGqWgMdvYE5Q-KkKjtpe-WzVkM&e= >> >>>>>>>>>> caching-capacity-interface/>. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> [OC-RR] Finkelman, O., Ed., Hofmann, J., Klein, E., >> Mishra, S., >> >>>>>>>>>> Ma, K., Sahar, D., and B. Zurat, "Open Caching >> Request >> >>>>>>>>>> Routing - Functional Specification", Version 1.1, >> 4 >> >>>>>>>>>> October 2019, < >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.svta.org_product_open-2Dcache-2D&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=3bJrpgTW4v3Hy1yHCQjtqSiB7fYyWqXSQ3sc2koTq-E&e= >> >>>>>>>>>> request-routing-functional-specification/>. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> [OCWG] "Open Caching Home Page", < >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__opencaching.svta.org_&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=gMxEpeLepdyiTUVETw0ntKT_OKiZiIBDT2ZCPpbmYNI&e= >> >. >> >>>>>>>>>> --> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 7) <!-- [rfced] Terminology >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> a) Throughout the text, the following terminology appears to >> be used >> >>>>>>>>>> inconsistently. Please review these occurrences and let us >> know if/how they >> >>>>>>>>>> may be made consistent. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> capability object type >> >>>>>>>>>> Capability Objects >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> capacity limit-types >> >>>>>>>>>> Capacity Limits >> >>>>>>>>>> CDNI Capacity Limit Types >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> CapacityLimit Object >> >>>>>>>>>> CapacityLimit object >> >>>>>>>>>> CapacityLimits Capability Object >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> FCI capability >> >>>>>>>>>> FCI.Capability >> >>>>>>>>>> FCI.Capabilities >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> limit-type >> >>>>>>>>>> limit type >> >>>>>>>>>> Limit Type >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Payload types >> >>>>>>>>>> Payload Types >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Telemetry Capability object >> >>>>>>>>>> Telemetry Capability Object >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Telemetry Source >> >>>>>>>>>> telemetry source >> >>>>>>>>>> Telemetry sources >> >>>>>>>>>> Telemetry Source Type >> >>>>>>>>>> telemetry source type >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Telemetry Source Metric Object >> >>>>>>>>>> Telemetry Source Metric objects >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Telemetry Source Object >> >>>>>>>>>> Telemetry Source object >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> b) Should the payload types in the following titles be updated >> to >> >>>>>>>>>> match the payload types listed in Table 3? >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Original: >> >>>>>>>>>> 3.1.1. CDNI FCI Telemetry Payload Type >> >>>>>>>>>> 3.1.2. CDNI FCI Capacity Limits Payload Type >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps: >> >>>>>>>>>> 3.1.1. CDNI FCI.Telemetry Payload Type >> >>>>>>>>>> 3.1.2. CDNI FCI.CapacityLimits Payload Type >> >>>>>>>>>> --> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 8) <!--[rfced] FYI - We updated the following expansions to >> the form on >> >>>>>>>>>> the right for consistency within this document and/or the RFC >> >>>>>>>>>> Series. Please let us know of any objections. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Content Delivery Networks Interconnection (CDNI) -> >> >>>>>>>>>> Content Delivery Network Interconnection (CDNI) >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Footprints & Capabilities Advertisement Interface (FCI) -> >> >>>>>>>>>> Footprint & Capabilities Advertisement interface (FCI) >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Time To Live (TTL) -> Time to Live (TTL) >> >>>>>>>>>> --> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 9) <!-- [rfced] Please consider whether the "type" attribute >> of any sourcecode >> >>>>>>>>>> element should be set. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> The current list of preferred values for "type" is available at >> >>>>>>>>>> < >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_rpc_wiki_doku.php-3Fid-3Dsourcecode-2Dtypes&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=lxoxH5_8FCu3HDpV69jV560MfhKrm85OLogUFbYoQlo&e= >> >. >> >>>>>>>>>> If the current list does not contain an applicable type, feel >> free to >> >>>>>>>>>> suggest additions for consideration. Note that it is also >> acceptable >> >>>>>>>>>> to leave the "type" attribute not set. >> >>>>>>>>>> --> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 10) <!-- [rfced] Please review whether any of the notes in >> this document >> >>>>>>>>>> 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.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__authors.ietf.org_en_rfcxml-2Dvocabulary-23aside&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=Hi5ORHYUp6kBRh6540mzqlkAcPoHj54_V6XCrJlpklI&e= >> ). >> >>>>>>>>>> --> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 11) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" >> portion of the online >> >>>>>>>>>> Style Guide < >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_styleguide_part2_-23inclusive-5Flanguage&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=zOByvY8vZ9PO6nu8YJqRUdxbYkDH8aQJ8ZB3DIbEt-g&e= >> > >> >>>>>>>>>> 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/st/kc >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 2025, at 3:12 PM, rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> *****IMPORTANT***** >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Updated 2025/06/27 >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 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.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_faq_&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=M7aDaJv6YYMR4ycHygvowIXwD24E8hJGeDeUpJkzUPI&e= >> ). >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 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.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__trustee.ietf.org_license-2Dinfo&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=YwzV_8LRqpj1ZdEEJaljBRxBv_HliHVQA_0SgXStCBI&e= >> ). >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> * 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.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__authors.ietf.org_rfcxml-2Dvocabulary&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=tPOWBxvUUULFFmPkCCsWWkKExPjciGhu-q3uwonGjCI&e= >> >. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> * 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.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailarchive.ietf.org_arch_msg_ietf-2Dannounce_yb6lpIGh-2D4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=-MvzUtpH-Q0OPeoVfWkHW8_SLXOx0TarEhxt65cOODU&e= >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> * The archive itself: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailarchive.ietf.org_arch_browse_auth48archive_&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=vAMxNzYMVj0_-oKaux9amO_6S8WYEo_Cl4CbcQuN2UE&e= >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> * 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.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808.xml&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=R7rJB5-T939fIuGVlQe9L5XrsjXCmvLZIBkL5B4zByI&e= >> >>>>>>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=MrtwWOKVtBRwSaOMJqxS0vX3tJA4cFeNebooaIei2lI&e= >> >>>>>>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808.pdf&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=yCLRH9lrO8ySKY0GfiS7GPyMb39diJNmsvVU_qH2S8c&e= >> >>>>>>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808.txt&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=Yy_n0pjdcbyGINdqqo78xahPXlhiGNc2si_jupQ_w_0&e= >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Diff file of the text: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808-2Ddiff.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=v7AK0d5qcf1xoOGKOWoHvEhHPHGoRwbQb01KEaf4hmI&e= >> >>>>>>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808-2Drfcdiff.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=aNHh2dRKlzYx_VUigxRWIll4xoG0bCYgd8Jp8bEiJVw&e= >> (side by side) >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Diff of the XML: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_authors_rfc9808-2Dxmldiff1.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=DWlooIpNrqofTj990-zaDL6g9cbnCgkeNVq3Hq9zwjY&e= >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Tracking progress >> >>>>>>>>>> ----------------- >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_auth48_rfc9808&d=DwIFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=XniVbishGiO2Ao9hKqSc-hTVIWCi3T-x6GdHR4ZTgoM&m=PJlGb8RmuB6Rz0kPP68c_SZjIZAoq4YgPtbu_2OsqSiZKCVK4r_Q8fQne4dWn-FE&s=ky-2SzhC7R9rMG22MIJkhIoFzkJ7Hx4DIjCOmy2EnTg&e= >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Please let us know if you have any questions. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your cooperation, >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> RFC Editor >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------- >> >>>>>>>>>> RFC9808 (draft-ietf-cdni-capacity-insights-extensions-12) >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Title : CDNI Capacity Capability Advertisement >> Extensions >> >>>>>>>>>> Author(s) : A. Ryan, B. Rosenblum, N. Sopher >> >>>>>>>>>> WG Chair(s) : Kevin J. Ma, Sanjay Mishra >> >>>>>>>>>> Area Director(s) : Gorry Fairhurst, Mike Bishop >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> <AUTH48_ RFC-to-be 9808 >> _draft-ietf-cdni-capacity-insights-extensions-12_ for your >> revie.pdf><rfc9808.xml> >> >>>> >> >>> >> > >> >>
-- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
