I am confused. The ASN.1 module in RFC 9579 and the one in the soon-to-be-RFC 9879 are identical.
Russ > On Sep 12, 2025, at 12:49 PM, Alicja Kario <[email protected]> wrote: > > I don't know the significance of the fact that the included ASN.1 Module > addresses one of the errata filed against the RFCs updated by this document. > > I don't think the proposed changes to Introduction actually makes the text > clearer. > > All the other included changes look good to me, so I'm OK with it > being published as-is. > > On Tuesday, 9 September 2025 01:59:11 CEST, [email protected] wrote: >> *****IMPORTANT***** >> >> Updated 2025/09/08 >> >> 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 >> * [email protected] (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). >> * [email protected], 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, >> [email protected] 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
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
-- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
