Hi Hooman, I've downloaded the new version -- thanks for the heads-up!
Sincerely, Sarah Tarrant RFC Production Center > On Oct 9, 2025, at 5:51 PM, Hooman Bidgoli (Nokia) <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Sarah > > I had to upload version 25 of the doc because of minor change for IANA. > > Just an FYI > > Thanks > Hooman > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 5:29 PM > To: Hooman Bidgoli (Nokia) <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; Gunter van de Velde (Nokia) > <[email protected]>; [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: Document intake questions about > <draft-ietf-pim-p2mp-policy-ping-24> > > > CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking > links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional > information. > > > > Hi Hooman, > > Thank you for your reply! We will incorporate this feedback during the > editing process. > > Sincerely, > Sarah Tarrant > RFC Production Center > >> On Oct 7, 2025, at 11:40 AM, Hooman Bidgoli (Nokia) >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> HI Sarah >> >> My apologies, please see inline >> >> Thanks >> Hooman >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 11:35 AM >> To: Hooman Bidgoli (Nokia) <[email protected]>; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] >> Cc: [email protected]; Gunter van de Velde (Nokia) >> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; >> [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Document intake questions about >> <draft-ietf-pim-p2mp-policy-ping-24> >> >> >> CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking >> links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional >> information. >> >> >> >> Hi Authors, >> >> This is a friendly reminder that we await answers to the questions below. >> >> Thank you, >> Sarah Tarrant >> RFC Production Center >> >>> On Sep 25, 2025, at 4:22 PM, Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Author(s), >>> >>> Congratulations, your document has been successfully added to the RFC >>> Editor queue! >>> The team at the RFC Production Center (RPC) is looking forward to >>> working with you as your document moves forward toward publication. >>> To help reduce processing time and improve editing accuracy, please >>> respond to the questions below. Please confer with your coauthors (or >>> authors of other documents if your document is in a >>> cluster) as necessary prior to taking action in order to streamline >>> communication. >>> If your document has multiple authors, only one author needs to reply >>> to this message. >>> >>> As you read through the rest of this email: >>> >>> * If you need/want to make updates to your document, we encourage you >>> to make those changes and resubmit to the Datatracker. This allows >>> for the easy creation of diffs, which facilitates review by interested >>> parties (e.g., authors, ADs, doc shepherds). >>> * If you feel no updates to the document are necessary, please reply >>> with any applicable rationale/comments. >>> >>> >>> Please note that the RPC team will not work on your document until we >>> hear from you (that is, your document will remain in AUTH state until >>> we receive a reply). Even if you don't have guidance or don't feel >>> that you need to make any updates to the document, you need to let us >>> know. After we hear from you, your document will start moving through >>> the queue. You will be able to review and approve our updates during AUTH48. >>> >>> Please feel free to contact us with any questions you may have at >>> [email protected]. >>> >>> Thank you! >>> The RPC Team >>> >>> -- >>> >>> 1) As there may have been multiple updates made to the document >>> during Last Call, please review the current version of the document: >>> >>> * Is the text in the Abstract still accurate? >>> * Are the References, Authors' Addresses, Contributors, and >>> Acknowledgments sections current? >>> >> HB> yes they are >>> >>> 2) Please share any style information that could help us with editing >>> your document. For example: >>> >>> * Is your document's format or its terminology based on another document? >>> If so, please provide a pointer to that document (e.g., this >>> document's terminology should match DNS terminology in RFC 9499). >>> * Is there a pattern of capitalization or formatting of terms? (e.g., >>> field names should have initial capitalization; parameter names >>> should be in double quotes; <tt/> should be used for token names; >>> etc.) >>> >> HB> Some terminology refers to draft-ietf-pim-sr-p2mp-policy-22 >>> >>> 3) Is there any text that should be handled extra cautiously? For >>> example, are there any sections that were contentious when the document was >>> drafted? >>> >> HB> no but we are trying to keep the terminology inline with >> draft-ietf-pim-sr-p2mp-policy-22. There revisions were done because of this. >>> >>> 4) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while >>> editing this document? >>> >> HB> no >>> >>> 5) This document is part of Cluster 556. >>> >>> * To help the reader understand the content of the cluster, is there >>> a document in the cluster that should be read first? Next? If so, >>> please provide the order and we will provide RFC numbers for the documents >>> accordingly. >>> If order is not important, please let us know. >> >> HB> Yes. draft-ietf-pim-sr-p2mp-policy-22 is the basis of >> draft-ietf-pim-p2mp-policy-ping-24 and should be read first. >> >>> * Is there any text that has been repeated within the cluster >>> document that should be edited in the same way (for instance, >>> parallel introductory text or Security Considerations)? >> HB> no >>> >>> >>>> On Sep 25, 2025, at 4:13 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> Author(s), >>>> >>>> Your document draft-ietf-pim-p2mp-policy-ping-24, which has been >>>> approved for publication as an RFC, has been added to the RFC Editor >>>> queue <https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php>. >>>> >>>> If your XML file was submitted using the I-D submission tool >>>> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/>, we have already retrieved it >>>> and have started working on it. >>>> >>>> If you did not submit the file via the I-D submission tool, or if >>>> you have an updated version (e.g., updated contact information), >>>> please send us the file at this time by attaching it in your reply >>>> to this message and specifying any differences between the approved >>>> I-D and the file that you are providing. >>>> >>>> You will receive a separate message from us asking for style input. >>>> Please respond to that message. When we have received your >>>> response, your document will then move through the queue. The first >>>> step that we take as your document moves through the queue is >>>> converting it to RFCXML (if it is not already in RFCXML) and >>>> applying the formatting steps listed at >>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/pubprocess/how-we-update/>. >>>> Next, we will edit for clarity and apply the style guide >>>> (<https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/>). >>>> >>>> You can check the status of your document at >>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php>. >>>> >>>> You will receive automatic notifications as your document changes >>>> queue state (for more information about these states, please see >>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/queue/>). When we have completed >>>> our edits, we will move your document to AUTH48 state and ask you to >>>> perform a final review of the document. >>>> >>>> Please let us know if you have any questions. >>>> >>>> Thank you. >>>> >>>> The RFC Editor Team > > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
