Hi Scott and Douglas,

Thank you for the feedback!

Just to clarify, based on the response about artwork/sourcecode, we will leave 
the artwork as artwork since it's not strictly code to be used literally.

Sincerely,
Sarah Tarrant
RFC Production Center

> On Nov 16, 2025, at 3:42 PM, Douglas Stebila <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Answers inline below.
> 
>> 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 is still accurate?
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> * Are the References, Authors' Addresses, Contributors, and Acknowledgments 
>> sections current?
> 
> Yes
> 
>> 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).
> 
> Should match TLS terminology in RFC 8446.
> 
>> * 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.)
> 
> Field names should follow TLS conventions and are we believe already 
> formatted this way.
> 
>> 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?
> 
> The paragraph titled "Failures" in section 4 should be removed as per 
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/qdW6qWeOQMfyQ8bMZkfwulKq3rE/
> 
>> 4) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while editing this 
>> document?
> 
> Not that I'm aware of.
> 
>> 5) This document uses one or more of the following text styles. 
>> Are these elements used consistently?
>> 
>> * fixed width font (<tt/> or `)
>> * italics (<em/> or *)
>> * bold (<strong/> or **)
> 
> I think so.
> 
>> 6) This document contains artwork that might be sourcecode: 
>> 
>> * Please identify which (if any) artwork elements are sourcecode
>> * Does the sourcecode validate?
>> * Some sourcecode types (e.g., YANG) require certain references and/or text 
>> in the Security Considerations section. Is this information correct?
>> * Is the sourcecode type indicated in the XML? (see information about 
>> sourcecode types).
> 
> No artwork is strictly source code.  
> - The first two pieces of artwork in Section 3.2 are TLS data structures.
> - The next two pieces of artwork in Section 3.2 are a mix of pseudocode in no 
> particular language and a representation of a TLS data structure.
> - The first piece of artwork in Section 3.3 is pseudocode in no particular 
> language.
> - The second piece of artwork in Section 3.3 is based on the figure in 
> Section 7.1 of RFC 8446
> 
>> 7) This document is part of Cluster 553. 
>> 
>> * 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. 
>> * 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.
> 
> Although related by the topic of post-quantum cryptography, they are 
> independent and need no connection.
> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 5, 2025, at 12:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> 
>>> The document draft-ietf-tls-hybrid-design-16 has 
>>> changed from EDIT state to AUTH state. We thought you'd like to know. 
>>> You can also follow your document's state at
>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php>.
>>> For definitions of state names, please see
>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/queue/#state_def>.
>>> 
>>> If you have questions, please send mail to [email protected].
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> The RFC Editor Team
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

-- 
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to