Hi, Lou. We have noted your approval on the AUTH48 status page:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9894 Thank you very much! If you'll be celebrating the long weekend, we hope you have a good one! Lynne Bartholomew RFC Production Center > On Nov 26, 2025, at 9:05 AM, Lou Berger <[email protected]> wrote: > > Looks good to me too - thank you! > Lou > ---------- > On November 25, 2025 1:36:45 PM Lynne Bartholomew > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, Donald. >> We have noted your approval on the AUTH48 status page: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9894 >> Thank you very much for your help with this document! >> Lynne Bartholomew >> RFC Production Center >>> On Nov 25, 2025, at 9:55 AM, Donald Eastlake <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Lynne, >>> I have reviewed this rfc-to-be and approve publication. >>> Thanks, >>> Donald >>> =============================== >>> Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) >>> 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA >>> [email protected] >>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 12:15 PM Lynne Bartholomew >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi, Donald. We have changed "composed of" to "built on" per your note in >>> email for RFC-to-be 9895: >>>>> 1. Should "composed of" be changed to "built on" in RFC-to-be 9894 >>>>> as well, as was done per your first note further below for this >>>>> document? >>>>> From the latest rfc9894.txt: >>>>> The extension defined in this document is composed of the mechanisms >>>> >>>> Donald: Yes, I think the change should be made in RFC-to-be 9894 as well. >>> >>> The latest files are posted here. Please refresh your browser: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894.txt >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894.pdf >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894.html >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894.xml >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-diff.html >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-auth48diff.html >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-lastdiff.html >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-lastrfcdiff.html (side by side) >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-xmldiff1.html >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-xmldiff2.html >>> Thank you! >>> Lynne Bartholomew >>> RFC Production Center >>>> On Nov 17, 2025, at 11:24 AM, Lynne Bartholomew >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Hi, Donald. Thank you for your prompt reply! We have updated this >>>> document per your notes below. >>>> The latest files are posted here. Please refresh your browser: >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894.txt >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894.pdf >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894.html >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894.xml >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-diff.html >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-auth48diff.html >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by >>>> side) >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-xmldiff1.html >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-xmldiff2.html >>>> Thanks again! >>>> Lynne Bartholomew >>>> RFC Production Center >>>>> On Nov 16, 2025, at 6:37 PM, Donald Eastlake <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 5:08 PM <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Authors, >>>>>> While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as >>>>>> necessary) the following questions, which are also in the source >>>>>> file. >>>>>> 1) <!-- [rfced] Document title: FYI, for ease of the reader and per our >>>>>> process, we expanded "DLEP" in the title. Please review. >>>>>> Original: >>>>>> DLEP DiffServ Aware Credit Window Extension >>>>>> Currently: >>>>>> Dynamic Link Exchange Protocol (DLEP) Diffserv Aware Credit Window >>>>>> Extension >>>>>> --> >>>>> >>>>> OK. >>>>>> 2) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear in >>>>>> the >>>>>> title) for use on <https://www.rfc-editor.org/search>. --> >>>>> >>>>> I can't think of any other good keywords. >>>>>> 3) <!-- [rfced] For ease of the reader, we expanded "CLI" where first >>>>>> used, per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide" - >>>>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7322>). Please review, and >>>>>> let us know any objections. >>>>>> CLI: Command-Line Interface --> >>>>> >>>>> Since it appears the "CLI" is used only once, I suggest deleting >>>>> "(CLI)" and just saying "Command-Line Interface". >>>>>> 4) <!-- [rfced] Section 3: We changed "the mismatch of capabilities" to >>>>>> "any mismatch in capabilities" per >>>>>> draft-ietf-manet-dlep-ether-credit-extension. Please let us know any >>>>>> objections. >>>>>> Original: >>>>>> In either case, the mismatch of capabilities SHOULD be >>>>>> reported to the user via normal network management mechanisms such as >>>>>> user interface messages or error logging. >>>>>> Currently: >>>>>> In either case, any mismatch in capabilities SHOULD be >>>>>> reported to the user via normal network management mechanisms, such >>>>>> as user interface messages or error logging. --> >>>>> >>>>> OK. Consistency with ether-credit-extension is good. >>>>>> 5) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of the >>>>>> online Style Guide at >>>>>> <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. --> >>>>> >>>>> I do not think any changes are needed for this reason. >>>>>> 6) <!-- [rfced] Please let us know if any changes are needed for the >>>>>> following: >>>>>> a) The following term was used inconsistently in this document. >>>>>> We chose to use the latter form. Please let us know any objections. >>>>>> Sub-Data item / Sub-Data Item (as used elsewhere in this document >>>>>> and per the other documents in this group (Cluster 541 / >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/cluster_info.php?cid=C541) of documents) >>>>> >>>>> Use of the all-caps version is fine. >>>>>> b) The following term appears to be used inconsistently in this document. >>>>>> Please let us know which form is preferred. (Note that we updated >>>>>> "DiffServ" >>>>>> to "Diffserv" in the document already.) >>>>>> DiffServ Aware Credit Window Type Value / >>>>>> DiffServ Aware Credit Window Extension Type Value --> >>>>> >>>>> Probably best to go with the more explicit version including the word >>>>> "Extension". >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Donald >>>>> =============================== >>>>> Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) >>>>> 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA >>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> Thank you. >>>>>> Lynne Bartholomew and Rebecca VanRheenen >>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>> >>>>>> On Nov 14, 2025, at 2:05 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>>>> *****IMPORTANT***** >>>>>> Updated 2025/11/14 >>>>>> 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/rfc9894.xml >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894.html >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894.pdf >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894.txt >>>>>> Diff file of the text: >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-diff.html >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>>>>> Diff of the XML: >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9894-xmldiff1.html >>>>>> Tracking progress >>>>>> ----------------- >>>>>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9894 >>>>>> Please let us know if you have any questions. >>>>>> Thank you for your cooperation, >>>>>> RFC Editor >>>>>> -------------------------------------- >>>>>> RFC9894 (draft-ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension-21) >>>>>> Title : DLEP DiffServ Aware Credit Window Extension >>>>>> Author(s) : B. Cheng, D. Wiggins, L. Berger, D. Eastlake 3rd, Ed. >>>>>> WG Chair(s) : Don Fedyk, Ronald in 't Velt, Donald E. Eastlake 3rd >>>>>> Area Director(s) : Jim Guichard, Ketan Talaulikar, Gunter Van de Velde >>>>> >>>> >>> >> -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
