Hi Sean, We have updated the text as described below. With this update, we believe you approve the RFC for publication and have noted your approval on the AUTH48 page <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9881>. We will continue with the publication process shortly.
Thank you, Sandy Ginoza RFC Production Center > On Oct 28, 2025, at 7:44 AM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sorry I should have waited to send this after I got done with my PR — and now > I’m done. > > Tweak in c.3: > > OLD: > > | The example certificates in this section have key usage bits > | set to digitalSignature, keyCertSign, and cRLSign to lessen the > | number of examples, i.e., brevity. Certificate Policies (CPs) > | [RFC3647] for production CAs should consider whether this > | combination is appropriate. > > NOTE: The > > NEW: > > | NOTE: The example certificates in this section have key usage bits > | set to digitalSignature, keyCertSign, and cRLSign to lessen the > | number of examples, i.e., brevity. Certificate Policies (CPs) > | [RFC3647] for production CAs should consider whether this > | combination is appropriate. > > The > > spt > > >> On Oct 28, 2025, at 10:26, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> And there I go again, it’s Table 2 ;) >> >> spt >> >>> On Oct 28, 2025, at 09:33, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> One final nit and then I approve: >>> >>> In Appendix B, the Caption for the Table was changed from Figure to Table >>> (correctly), but the reference out of the paragraph before the Table was >>> not changed: >>> >>> s/in Figure 1,/in Table 1, >>> >>> Cheers, >>> spt >>> >>>> On Oct 24, 2025, at 21:37, Sandy Ginoza <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Sean, >>>> >>>> Thank you for your careful review! We have updated the document as >>>> requested and posted the files here: >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9881.xml >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9881.txt >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9881.pdf >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9881.html >>>> >>>> Diffs highlighting the recent updates only: >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9881-lastdiff.html >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9881-lastrfcdiff.html (side by side) >>>> >>>> AUTH48 diffs: >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9881-auth48diff.html >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9881-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by >>>> side) >>>> >>>> Comprehensive diffs: >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9881-diff.html >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9881-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>>> >>>> We were going to ask about U+03BE — thanks for saving us a roundtrip! >>>> >>>> Please review the files and let us know if any further updates are needed >>>> or if you approve the RFC for publication. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Sandy Ginoza >>>> RFC Production Center >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Oct 22, 2025, at 7:40 PM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 22, 2025, at 18:24, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> 0) We should latinize xi too! There are 5 instances of xi in s6 and 3 in >>>>>> s8.1. >>>>>> >>>>>> For the first instance, i think it’s: >>>>>> >>>>>> OLD: >>>>>> a 32-octet seed (xi) and >>>>>> >>>>>> NEW: >>>>>> a 32-octet see (ξ) (GREEK SMALL LETTER XI, U+039E) and >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sorry it’s U+03BE. >>>>> >>>>> spt >>>> >>>> >>> >> > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
