Hi David, Looks great!
Thank you, RFC Editor/st > On Jul 29, 2025, at 11:14 PM, David Dong via RT <iana-mat...@iana.org> wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > We've made this update: > > generic An object that allows for advertisement of generic data sources > [RFC-ietf-cdni-capacity-insights-extensions-12] > > Registry: > https://www.iana.org/assignments/cdni-parameters/ > > Best regards, > > David Dong > IANA Services Sr. Specialist > > On Tue Jul 29 21:53:48 2025, starr...@staff.rfc-editor.org wrote: >> Hi IANA, >> >> At <https://www.iana.org/assignments/cdni-parameters/cdni- >> parameters.xhtml>, please make the following update under the "CDNI >> Telemetry Source Types” registry: >> >> Old: >> Source Type: generic >> Reference: [RFC-ietf-cdni-capacity-insights-extensions-12] >> >> New: >> Source Type: generic >> Description: An object that allows for advertisement of generic data >> sources >> Reference: [RFC-ietf-cdni-capacity-insights-extensions-12] >> >> Thank you, >> RFC Editor/st >> >>> On Jul 29, 2025, at 1:52 PM, Nir Sopher <nirsop...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Thank you Sarah, >>> Please leave the email address as is (the apache one) >>> Thanks, >>> Nir >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 25, 2025, 06:20 Sarah Tarrant <starr...@staff.rfc- >>> editor.org> wrote: >>> Hi Nir, >>> >>> Thank you for your reply. We have marked your approval on the AUTH48 >>> status page for this document (see https://www.rfc- >>> editor.org/auth48/rfc9808). >>> >>> Would you like your contact info updated in the draft? >>> >>> Current: >>> Nir B. Sopher >>> Qwilt >>> 6, Ha'harash >>> Hod HaSharon 4524079 >>> Israel >>> Email: n...@apache.org <mailto:n...@apache.org> >>> >>> Perhaps: >>> Nir B. Sopher >>> Qwilt >>> 6, Ha'harash >>> Hod HaSharon 4524079 >>> Israel >>> Email: nirsop...@gmail.com <mailto:nirsop...@gmail.com> >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> RFC Editor/st >>> >>>> On Jul 25, 2025, at 2:17 AM, Nir Sopher <nirsop...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'm approving the doc >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 24, 2025, 14:53 Mishra, Sanjay >>>> <sanjay.mis...@verizon.com> wrote: >>>> +Nir Sopher >>>> >>>> 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 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
