Hey Alanna, Thank you and everyone else for all the final stages work on this!
I approve the updated text. Thanks, Tommy 2025-09-30T00:07:43Z Alanna Paloma <[email protected]>: > Hi Jen, > > Thank you for your approval. It has been noted on the AUTH48 status page: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9872 > > Once we receive approvals from Nick and Tommy, we will move this document > forward in the publication process. > > Best regards, > Alanna Paloma > RFC Production Center > >> On Sep 29, 2025, at 4:48 PM, Jen Linkova <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Alanna, >> >> Thank you very much for making those changes. >> I approve the updated text. >> >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 4:55 AM Alanna Paloma >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Jen, >>> >>> Thank you for sending those additional changes. We have updated the files >>> accordingly. >>> >>> FYI - Per your request to add a citation to RFC 6146, we have added a >>> reference entry for it in the Informative References section. >>> >>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872.xml >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872.txt >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872.html >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872.pdf >>> >>> The relevant diff files have been posted here: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872-diff.html (comprehensive diff) >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872-auth48diff.html (AUTH48 changes) >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872-auth48rfcdiff.html (AUTH48 >>> changes side by side) >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872-lastdiff.html (last version to >>> this one) >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872-lastrfcdiff.html (rfcdiff >>> between last version and this) >>> >>> We will await approvals from each party listed on the AUTH48 status page >>> prior to moving this document forward in the publication process. >>> >>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9872 >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Alanna Paloma >>> RFC Production Center >>> >>>> On Sep 26, 2025, at 5:22 PM, Jen Linkova <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Alanna, >>>> >>>> Sorry for the delayed response, we (the authors) discussed the changes >>>> and have a few more comments: >>>> >>>> 1) The short title update from " >>>> Original: >>>> Prefer RFC8781 >>>> >>>> Current: >>>> IPv6 Prefix Discovery >>>> >>>> IMHO “IPv6 Prefix” sounds confusing and a bit meaningless. Also, the >>>> proposed mechanism can be used in dual-stack networks, strictly >>>> speaking. >>>> Therefore we'd like to suggest: >>>> NEW: >>>> “NAT64 Prefix Discovery”. >>>> >>>> >>>> 2) >>>> CURRENT: >>>> PREF64: Pref64::/n or NAT64 prefix. An IPv6 prefix used for IPv6 >>>> address synthesis and for network addresses and protocols translation >>>> from IPv6 clients to IPv4 servers using the algorithm defined in >>>> [RFC6052]. >>>> >>>> PREF64 definition saying “from IPv6 clients to IPv4 servers” isn’t >>>> strictly accurate, and the double use of addresses felt awkward >>>> compared to the straightforward definition in 8781: “An IPv6 prefix >>>> used for IPv6 address synthesis [RFC6146].” We should reuse the 8781 >>>> definition, especially given the close relationship between this draft >>>> and 8781. >>>> So we are proposing: >>>> NEW: >>>> PREF64: Pref64::/n or NAT64 prefix. An IPv6 prefix used for IPv6 >>>> address synthesis [RFC6146]. >>>> >>>> 3) ORIGINAL: >>>> Fundamentally, the presence of the NAT64 and the exact value of the >>>> prefix used for the translation are network-specific attributes. >>>> >>>> Your comment was: " >>>> As "are network-specific attributes" seems to directly describe "NAT64 >>>> and the exact values" rather than their presence, may we remove "the >>>> presence of" from this sentence?", >>>> >>>> so the text was changed to >>>> CURRENT: >>>> "Fundamentally, the NAT64 function and the exact value of the prefix >>>> used for the translation are network-specific attributes." >>>> >>>> However I'd disagree with a statement that "network-specific >>>> attributes" seems to directly describe "NAT64 and the exact values" >>>> rather than their presence“. >>>> >>>> It’s exactly the presence (or lack of thereof) which the device needs >>>> to detect, and if there is NAT64 - then the specific prefix value. >>>> >>>> So I’d either keep the original, or propose >>>> NEW: >>>> The presence or absence of NAT64 functionality, as well as its >>>> associated prefix (if present), are network-dependent attributes. >>>> >>>> Thank you! >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 5:36 AM Alanna Paloma >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Nick, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for your reply. We have updated as requested. >>>>> >>>>> FYI - Per your response to query 11, we have made additional updates >>>>> throughout the document to clarify the usage of RFC citation tags. See >>>>> these updates in the files below. >>>>> >>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872.xml >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872.txt >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872.html >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872.pdf >>>>> >>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872-diff.html (comprehensive diff) >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872-auth48diff.html (AUTH48 >>>>> changes) >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9872-auth48rfcdiff.html (AUTH48 >>>>> changes side by side) >>>>> >>>>> Please review the document carefully and contact us with any further >>>>> updates you may have. Note that we do not make changes once a document >>>>> is published as an RFC. >>>>> >>>>> We will await approvals from each party listed on the AUTH48 status page >>>>> below prior to moving this document forward in the publication process. >>>>> >>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9872 >>>>> >>>>> Thank you, >>>>> Alanna Paloma >>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>> >>>>>> … >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Cheers, Jen Linkova >>> >> >> >> -- >> Cheers, Jen Linkova -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
