Hi Mahesh,

Thank you for the clarification! I've added the notes from 
draff-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers to this draft in our database so that I 
don't get confused again.

There should be notification shortly about this draft moving from AUTH to EDIT 
state.

Sincerely,
Sarah Tarrant
RFC Production Center

> On Nov 21, 2025, at 11:02 AM, Mahesh Jethanandani <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Sarah,
> 
> Jeff in his response to the intake questions on 
> draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers, had indicated that the responses to 
> that document’s intake question would apply to all (three) “BFD Auth drafts”. 
> They are:
> 
> - this draft
> - draff-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers
> - draft-ietf-bfd-stability
> 
> Jeff has responded to the second, and I have responded to the third 
> document’s intake questions. All three of them, I believe, are being edited 
> by you. If you want us to respond to this individually, do let us know.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
>> On Nov 21, 2025, at 7:56 AM, Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Author(s),
>> 
>> This is a friendly reminder that we await answers to the questions below 
>> before continuing with the editing process for this document. 
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> Sarah Tarrant
>> RFC Production Center
>> 
>>> On Nov 13, 2025, at 11:09 AM, 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 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? 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 6) This document contains 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.)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 7) This document is part of Cluster 562. 
>>> 
>>> * 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)?
>>> * For more information about clusters, see 
>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/clusters/
>>> * For a list of all current clusters, see: 
>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/all_clusters.php
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 8) Would you like to participate in the RPC Pilot Test for editing in 
>>> kramdown-rfc?
>>> If so, please let us know and provide a self-contained kramdown-rfc file. 
>>> For more
>>> information about this experiment, see:
>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 9) Would you like to participate in the RPC Pilot Test for completing 
>>> AUTH48 in 
>>> GitHub? If so, please let us know. For more information about this 
>>> experiment, 
>>> see:
>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=rpc-github-phase-0-pilot-test.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Nov 13, 2025, at 11:05 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Author(s),
>>>> 
>>>> Your document draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication-36, 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
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> Mahesh Jethanandani
> [email protected]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

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

Reply via email to