Authors, This is a friendly reminder that we await your response to our previously sent questions.
We will wait to hear from you before continuing with the publication process. The AUTH48 status page for this document is located here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9836 Thank you, Alanna Paloma RFC Production Center > On Aug 11, 2025, at 10:51 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] May we clarify that the modules in [RFC9834] would be used > to manage ACs across the network? > > Original: > In order to avoid service interference and redundant > information in various locations, a service provider may expose an > interface to manage ACs network-wide using > [I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit]. > > Perhaps: > In order to avoid service interference and redundant > information in various locations, a service provider may expose an > interface to manage ACs network-wide using the modules in > [RFC9834]. > --> > > > 2) <!--[rfced] We note that Figure 3 uses "CE#1" and "CE#2", while other > figures in the document use "CE1" and "CE2". May we update the CEs in > Figure 3 to match the other figures in the document? > > If so, both artworks (svg and ascii-art) will be updated accordingly. > --> > > > 3) <!-- [rfced] We have a couple questions about this paragraph: > > Original: > This approach is consistent with the design in > [I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang] where an AC service > reference, called 'ac-svc-name', is used to indicate the names of > AC services. As per [I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang], > when both 'ac-svc-name' and the attributes of 'attachment- > circuits' are defined, the 'ac-svc-name' takes precedence. > > a) [I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang] does not appear to contain > the term "ac-svc-name". It does contain the term "ac-svc-ref". Should > "ac-svc-name" be updated to "ac-svc-ref"? > > b) Additionally, we note that this text was indented. As it is unclear to > us why it was indented, we have removed the indentation. Was the intent for > this to be a "Note"? If yes, this text can be used in the <aside> element, > which is defined as "a container for content that is semantically less > important or tangential to the content that surrounds it" > (https://authors.ietf.org/en/rfcxml-vocabulary#aside). > > Perhaps: > | This approach is consistent with the design in > | [I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang] where an AC service > | reference, called 'ac-svc-ref', is used to indicate the names of > | AC services. As per [I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang], > | when both 'ac-svc-ref' and the attributes of 'attachment- > | circuits' are defined, the 'ac-svc-ref' takes precedence. > --> > > > 4) <!--[rfced] May we clarify that the "ietf-ac-ntw" module in [RFC9835] > is used? > > Original: > [I-D.ietf-opsawg-ntw-attachment-circuit] can be > also used to access AC-related details that are bound to the target > SAP (Figure 12). > > Perhaps: > The "ietf-ac-ntw" module [RFC9835] can be also used to access > AC-related details that are bound to the target SAP (Figure 12). > --> > > > 5) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We updated artwork to sourcecode in Section 5. Please > confirm that this is correct. > > In addition, please consider whether the "type" attribute of each sourcecode > element has been set correctly. > > The current list of preferred values for "type" is available at > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=sourcecode-types>. > 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. > --> > > > 6) <!--[rfced] Abbreviations > > a) FYI - We have added expansion for the following abbreviation > per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide"). Please review each > expansion in the document carefully to ensure correctness. > > Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) > > b) Both the expansion and the acronym for the following terms are used > throughout the document. Would you like to update to using the expansion > upon first usage and the acronym for the rest of the document for consistency? > > attachment circuit (AC) > Layer 2 VPN (L2VPN) > Layer 3 VPN (L3VPN) > --> > > > 7) <!-- [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. > --> > > > Thank you. > > RFC Editor/ap/ar > > > On Aug 11, 2025, at 10:50 PM, rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org wrote: > > *****IMPORTANT***** > > Updated 2025/08/11 > > 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/rfc9836.xml > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9836.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9836.pdf > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9836.txt > > Diff file of the text: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9836-diff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9836-rfcdiff.html (side by side) > > Diff of the XML: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9836-xmldiff1.html > > > Tracking progress > ----------------- > > The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9836 > > Please let us know if you have any questions. > > Thank you for your cooperation, > > RFC Editor > > -------------------------------------- > RFC9836 (draft-ietf-opsawg-ac-lxsm-lxnm-glue-14) > > Title : A YANG Data Model for Augmenting VPN Service and Network > Models with Attachment Circuits > Author(s) : M. Boucadair, R. Roberts, S. Barguil Giraldo, O. Gonzalez > de Dios > WG Chair(s) : Joe Clarke, Benoît Claise > Area Director(s) : Mohamed Boucadair, Mahesh Jethanandani > -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
