Hello Authors,

This is a friendly reminder that we await answers to the answers below.

Thank you,
Sarah Tarrant
RFC Production Center

> On Oct 20, 2025, at 1:48 PM, [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 Authors' Addresses, Contributors, and Acknowledgments 
> sections current?
> 
> 
> 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.)
> 
> 
> 3) Please review the entries in the References section carefully with 
> the following in mind. Note that we will update as follows unless we 
> hear otherwise at this time:
> 
> -References to obsoleted RFCs will be updated to point to the current 
> RFC on the topic in accordance with Section 4.8.6 of RFC 7322 
> (RFC Style Guide).
> 
> -References to I-Ds that have been replaced by another I-D will be 
> updated to point to the replacement I-D.
> 
> -References to documents from other organizations that have been 
> superseded will be updated to their superseding version.
> 
> Note: To check for outdated RFC and I-D references, you can use 
> idnits <https://author-tools.ietf.org/idnits>. You can also help the
> IETF Tools Team by testing idnits3 <https://author-tools.ietf.org/idnits3/>
> with your document and reporting any issues to them.
> 
> 
> 4) Is there any text that should be handled extra cautiously? For example, 
> are 
> there any sections that were contentious when the document was drafted? 
> 
> 
> 5) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while editing this 
> document? 
> 
> --
> 
> On Oct 20, 2025, at 11:01 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> 
> Author(s),
> 
> Your document draft-ietf-cose-dilithium-10, 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]

Reply via email to