Hi Mark, We have noted your approval on the AUTH48 status page for this document; see https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9875.
We will begin to prepare this document for publication at this time. Best regards, Rebecca VanRheenen RFC Production Center > On Oct 21, 2025, at 2:35 PM, Mark Nottingham <[email protected]> wrote: > > Nope, that's good - thanks! Approved. > > >> On 22 Oct 2025, at 8:31 am, Rebecca VanRheenen >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Mark, >> >> I removed the quotes from "grouping” and “cascade”. Sorry about that! I >> misunderstood your reply to that question. >> >> Are any additional updates needed? >> >> Here are the updated files: >> >> Updated XML file: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875.xml >> >> Updated output files: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875.txt >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875.pdf >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875.html >> >> Diff files showing all changes made during AUTH48: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875-auth48diff.html >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by side) >> >> Diff files showing all changes: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875-diff.html >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >> >> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9875 >> >> Thank you, >> >> Rebecca VanRheenen >> RFC Production Center >> >> >> >>> On Oct 21, 2025, at 2:08 PM, Mark Nottingham <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I still see the "scare quotes" in the authors version. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> >>>> On 22 Oct 2025, at 7:01 am, Rebecca VanRheenen >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Mark, >>>> >>>> Thanks for the quick reply! All of our questions have now been addressed. >>>> Please let us know if any further updates are needed or if you approve the >>>> document in its current form. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Rebecca VanRheenen >>>> RFC Production Center >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Oct 21, 2025, at 12:13 PM, Mark Nottingham <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> That one should remain lowercase. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On 22 Oct 2025, at 5:02 am, Rebecca VanRheenen >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Mark, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the reply! We updated the document accordingly. >>>>>> >>>>>> We have one more question. We updated the “string” to “String” in >>>>>> Section 2 per your reply, but a lowercase instance of “strings” still >>>>>> appears in the abstract. Would you like to capitalize that instance, or >>>>>> should it remain lowercase? >>>>>> >>>>>> Current: >>>>>> This specification introduces a means of describing the relationships >>>>>> between stored responses in HTTP caches, "grouping" them by >>>>>> associating a stored response with one or more strings. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> — FILES (please refresh) — >>>>>> >>>>>> Updated XML file: >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875.xml >>>>>> >>>>>> Updated output files: >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875.txt >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875.pdf >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875.html >>>>>> >>>>>> Diff files showing all changes made during AUTH48: >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875-auth48diff.html >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by >>>>>> side) >>>>>> >>>>>> Diff files showing all changes: >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875-diff.html >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>>>>> >>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9875 >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>> >>>>>> Rebecca VanRheenen >>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 20, 2025, at 8:56 PM, Mark Nottingham >>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Responses below. Could you please change the city in my address from >>>>>>> Prahran to Melbourne, and change my organisation to Cloudflare? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 30 Sep 2025, at 12:41 pm, [email protected] wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mark, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as >>>>>>>> necessary) the following questions, which are also in the source file. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1) <!-- [rfced] Will readers understand what "it" refers to here? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Original: >>>>>>>> In addition to sharing invalidation events, the relationships >>>>>>>> indicated by grouping can also be used by caches to optimise their >>>>>>>> operation; for example, it could be used to inform the operation of >>>>>>>> cache eviction algorithms. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Perhaps: >>>>>>>> In addition to sharing invalidation events, the relationships >>>>>>>> indicated by grouping can also be used by caches to optimise their >>>>>>>> operation; for example, grouping could be used to inform the operation >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> cache eviction algorithms. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Or: >>>>>>>> In addition to sharing invalidation events, the relationships >>>>>>>> indicated by grouping can also be used by caches to optimise their >>>>>>>> operation (e.g., to inform the operation of >>>>>>>> cache eviction algorithms). >>>>>>>> --> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The latter please. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2) <!-- [rfced] Section 3.3.1 of [STRUCTURED-FIELDS] is titled >>>>>>>> "Integers". Was >>>>>>>> the text/reference below instead meant to point to Section 3.3.3, >>>>>>>> which is >>>>>>>> titled "Strings"? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Also, may we update "Cache-Groups HTTP Response Header" in the first >>>>>>>> sentence >>>>>>>> to "Cache-Groups response header field" for consistency with other >>>>>>>> instances >>>>>>>> in the document? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes please. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 3) <!-- [rfced] Are the quotation marks needed around "grouping" and >>>>>>>> "cascade" in >>>>>>>> these sentences? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Original: >>>>>>>> This specification introduces a means of describing the relationships >>>>>>>> between stored responses in HTTP caches, "grouping" them by >>>>>>>> associating a stored response with one or more strings. >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> Note that further grouped invalidations are not triggered by a >>>>>>>> grouped invalidation; i.e., this mechanism does not "cascade." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Perhaps: >>>>>>>> This specification introduces a means of describing the relationships >>>>>>>> between stored responses in HTTP caches, grouping them by >>>>>>>> associating a stored response with one or more strings. >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> Note that further grouped invalidations are not triggered by a >>>>>>>> grouped invalidation; i.e., this mechanism does not cascade. >>>>>>>> --> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, "please." >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 4) <!-- [rfced] We note inconsistencies in the terms below throughout >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> text. Please review all instances and let us know if any updates are >>>>>>>> needed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> list vs. List >>>>>>>> string vs. String >>>>>>>> --> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In "The Cache-Groups Response Header Field", change "list" to "Each >>>>>>> member of the List is a value that identifies a group that the response >>>>>>> belongs to." Likewise in "The Cache-Group-Invalidation Response Header >>>>>>> Field". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In "The Cache-Groups Response Header Field", change "strings" to "These >>>>>>> Strings are opaque". >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 5) <!-- [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. >>>>>>>> --> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Noted. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As always, thank you so much! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kaelin Foody and Rebecca VanRheenen >>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sep 29, 2025, at 10:39 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *****IMPORTANT***** >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Updated 2025/09/29 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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/rfc9875.xml >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875.html >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875.pdf >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875.txt >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Diff file of the text: >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875-diff.html >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Diff of the XML: >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9875-xmldiff1.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tracking progress >>>>>>>> ----------------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9875 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please let us know if you have any questions. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you for your cooperation, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> RFC Editor >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> RFC9875 (draft-ietf-httpbis-cache-groups-07) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Title : HTTP Cache Groups >>>>>>>> Author(s) : M. Nottingham >>>>>>>> WG Chair(s) : Mark Nottingham, Tommy Pauly >>>>>>>> Area Director(s) : Gorry Fairhurst, Mike Bishop >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >>> >> > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
