Authors, While preparing this document for publication, we internally discussed the annotations appearing in the references. As we do not believe these are helpful to the reader, we have removed them from the document.
The current files are available here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839.xml https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839.txt https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839.pdf https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839.html Diffs of the most recent updates: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-lastdiff.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-lastrfcdiff.html (side by side) AUTH48 diffs: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-auth48diff.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by side) Comprehensive diffs: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-diff.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-rfcdiff.html (side by side) Please review and let us know if you have any objections. We would appreciate an acknowledgement from at least one author before continuing with the publication process. Thank you, Sandy Ginoza RFC Production Center > On Aug 18, 2025, at 11:01 AM, Karen Moore <kmo...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: > > Hi Tim, > > Great! We will proceed with the publication process. > > Thanks to all for your time! > > Best regards, > > Karen Moore > RFC Production Center > > >> On Aug 16, 2025, at 4:44 AM, Tim Bray <tb...@textuality.com> wrote: >> >> On Aug 16, 2025 at 4:27:30 AM, Karen Moore <kmo...@staff.rfc-editor.org> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Tim, did you get a chance to double check the ABNF with James Manger? Note >>> that there were no issues with the ABNF checks on our end. >> >> Yes, and he reported the ABNF correct. >> >> -Tim >> >>> >>> >>> —Files (please refresh)— >>> >>> Updated XML file: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839.xml >>> >>> Updated output files: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839.txt >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839.pdf >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839.html >>> >>> Diff files showing all changes made during AUTH48: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-auth48diff.html >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>> >>> Diff files showing all changes: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-diff.html >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>> >>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9839 >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Karen Moore >>> RFC Production Center >>> >>>> On Aug 15, 2025, at 5:49 PM, Tim Bray <tb...@textuality.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> What Paul said. -Tim >>>> >>>> On Aug 15, 2025 at 9:48:57 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@icann.org> wrote: >>>>> On Aug 15, 2025, at 17:46, Karen Moore <kmo...@staff.rfc-editor.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Paul and Tim, >>>>>> >>>>>> We have noted your approvals on the AUTH48 status page >>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9839__;!!PtGJab4!7oxwV35xvNK7a5-YAwJ18sDgzernD7RGTdQBjWUZ3ZWW7y6rcYNL97wKIHgwwLghZqItgwMPZedHaSHC96i03-gMA6zozVI0uA$ >>>>>> [rfc-editor[.]org]>. Please confirm if you would like to update the >>>>>> text per Rob’s suggestion below. Otherwise, we will move forward with >>>>>> publication. >>>>>> >>>>>> Current (Section 3): >>>>>> [RFC9413], "Maintaining Robust Protocols", provides a thorough >>>>>> discussion of strategies for dealing with issues in input data. >>>>>> >>>>>> Perhaps: >>>>>> "Maintaining Robust Protocols” [RFC9413] provides a thorough >>>>>> discussion of strategies for dealing with issues in input data. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Either is fine. Please base your decision on the RFC Style Guide. If the >>>>> guide doesn't have such advice, feel free to pick one method and add it >>>>> to the style guide. >>>>> >>>>> --Paul Hoffman >>>>> >>>>> >>> > -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
