Great to have you back Remy and I hope you will stay engaged and contribute on ROLL WG as before ;-)
Thanks, Ketan On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 2:55 PM Liubing (Remy) <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear all, > > > > I am sorry for this really late reply. Just got my mail-out-sending > authority back. > > > > Thanks to Ines for recognizing my historical contributions. > > > > I am okay with the suggested changes from the editors. I approve this RFC > for publication. > > > > My sincere thanks to the RFC team for their effort in publishing this > draft. > > > > Remy > > > > *发件人:* Ines Robles <[email protected]> > *发送时间:* 2025年10月14日 16:57 > *收件人:* Ketan Talaulikar <[email protected]> > *抄送:* Kaelin Foody <[email protected]>; Charles Perkins < > [email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; Liubing (Remy) <[email protected]>; > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected] > *主题:* Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9854 <draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-20> for your > review > > > > Dear all, > > Based on the history, Bing (Remy) Liu joined version 03 of this IETF draft > in 2018. We are not familiar with his specific contributions from 2018 up > to the latest versions of the document (2025). We received feedback from > Liu on the IPR topic on 30 May 2023, during the year of the first IESG > submission (draft version 18). After that, the draft was improved based on > reviewers’ comments, but the main idea had already been established in the > first IESG submission, during which we understand Liu was active. > > Therefore, we would go with option 3 (“A stream manager can approve the > document in place of the unavailable author”). However, we would like all > the authors to discuss this among themselves and provide us with a single, > unified answer (so far, we have option 2 and option 3 from different > authors). > > Thus, please, Charlie, Anand, and Satish, let us know your unified answer *by > 21 October*. > > Thank you very much in advance, > > Ines and Aris > > > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 9:26 AM Ketan Talaulikar <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Charles/co-authors, Ines, Aris, > > > > Could you please recommend which of the 3 options indicated by Kaelin are > most appropriate in this case of this document? > > > > Thanks, > > Ketan > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 2:08 AM Kaelin Foody <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Charlie, all, > > Thank you for your response and for reaching out. > > > We have made good efforts to contact Remy Liubing and he has not > responded. It has been over a month. I would like to proceed forward with > publication of RFC9854. > > Per the FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/#missingauthor), we recommend > one of the following paths forward: > > 1. The author can be removed as an author and moved to the > Acknowledgements section. > 2. The author can be removed as an author and moved to the Contributors > section. > 3. A stream manager can approve the document in place of the unavailable > author. > (See the IESG Statement on AUTH48 State.) > > Option 3 is typically used in instances where the missing author made > significant contributions to the document, so > the other authors are not comfortable removing the individual from the > author list. > > Please review and let us know how you’d prefer to proceed. If you have an > alternative solution, please feel free to let us know. > > Thank you, > > Kaelin Foody > RFC Production Center > > > On Oct 7, 2025, at 2:20 PM, Charles Perkins <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hello folks, > > > > We have made good efforts to contact Remy Liubing and he has not > responded. It has been over a month. I would like to proceed forward with > publication of RFC9854. We have fulfilled all of the requests from the RFC > Editors team; many thanks for their improvements and suggestions, in > particular Kaelin Foody. > > > > Please let me know how I should proceed to facilitate the publication of > RFC9854. > > > > Regards, > > Charlie P. > > > > On 9/1/2025 10:19 PM, [email protected] wrote: > >> *****IMPORTANT***** > >> > >> Updated 2025/09/01 > >> > >> 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. > >> > >> > >> 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/rfc9854.xml > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9854.html > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9854.pdf > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9854.txt > >> > >> Diff file of the text: > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9854-diff.html > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9854-rfcdiff.html (side by side) > >> > >> Alt-diff of the text (allows you to more easily view changes > >> where text has been deleted or moved): > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9854-alt-diff.html > >> > >> Diff of the XML: > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9854-xmldiff1.html > >> > >> > >> Tracking progress > >> ----------------- > >> > >> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9854 > >> > >> Please let us know if you have any questions. > >> > >> Thank you for your cooperation, > >> > >> RFC Editor > >> > >> -------------------------------------- > >> RFC9854 (draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-20) > >> > >> Title : Supporting Asymmetric Links in Low Power Networks: AODV-RPL > >> Author(s) : C. Perkins, S.V.R. Anand, S. Anamalamudi, B. Liu > >> WG Chair(s) : Ines Robles, Remous-Aris Koutsiamanis > >> > >> Area Director(s) : Jim Guichard, Ketan Talaulikar, Gunter Van de Velde > >> > >> > >> > > > >
-- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
