On Wed, Dec 3, 2025 at 11:48 AM Lynne Bartholomew <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear authors, > > The authors of companion document RFC-to-be 9893 have changed 'logical > "Credit Window(s)"' to 'logical "credit window(s)"', because they went with > lowercase "credit window(s)" where this term is used generally. > > For consistency within this group of DLEP documents, may we change 'logical > "Credit Windows"' to 'logical "credit windows"' in this document as well?
I am OK with changing to lowercase. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA [email protected] > Currently: > ... Flow control is provided using one or more logical "Credit Windows", > > Thank you! > > Lynne Bartholomew > RFC Production Center > > > On Nov 26, 2025, at 12:52 PM, Lynne Bartholomew > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 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]
