Thank you Madison. I approve of the document's content. Cheers,
Joe On Tue, Dec 2, 2025 at 6:54 AM Madison Church <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Sean, > > Thank you for your reply! We have marked your approval for the document’s > content (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847). Once we receive > Joe’s approval for the content of the document, we will convert the > document to XML to make any remaining formatting updates and ask for > formatting approvals at that time. > > Thank you! > > Madison Church > RFC Production Center > > > On Dec 1, 2025, at 8:28 AM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > >> On Nov 26, 2025, at 14:32, Madison Church <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Sean, > >> > >> Thank you for your reply! Please see inline. > >> > >>> On Nov 26, 2025, at 10:55 AM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Madison, > >>> > >>> Hi! Question about formatting: > >>> > >>> I see that the asides were converted to quotes: > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html#name-recommended-note > >>> and > >>> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html#name-tls-exporter-labels-registr > >>> In other RFCs they stayed as asides: > >>> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9881.html#name-ml-dsa-public-keys-in-pkix > >>> > >>> Why are they different? > >> > >> Thank you for asking. We use {:quote} instead of {:aside} for notes > that appear in an IANA registry because the document is quoting the IANA > registry. We do not believe these fit the description of {:aside} (<aside> > in XML), which is defined as “a container for content that is semantically > less important or tangential to the content that surrounds it". > > > > Okay well that makes total sense ;) > > > >>> One other formatting thing: > >>> > >>> In s7: s/{{RFC8447, Section 17}}/{{Section 17 of RFC8447}} > >> > >> We have updated as requested! See updated files below. > >> > >> The files have been posted here (please refresh): > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.txt > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.pdf > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.xml > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.md > >> > >> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-diff.html > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-rfcdiff.html (side by side) > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-auth48diff.html > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by > side) > >> > >> Markdown diffs: > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-diff.html > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-rfcdiff.html (side by > side) > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-auth48diff.html > >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-auth48rfcdiff.html (side > by side) > >> > >> For the AUTH48 status of this document, see: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847. > >> > >> We will await content approvals from each author prior to moving > forward with formatting updates. > >> > >> For details of the AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc (including the > two-part approval process), see > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. > > > > I approve the formatting for this I-D. > > > > I also approve the contents for this I-D. > > > > spt > > > >> Thank you! > >> Madison Church > >> RFC Production Center > >> > >>> spt > >>> > >>>> On Nov 25, 2025, at 11:06, Madison Church < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Authors, > >>>> > >>>> This is a friendly reminder that we have yet to hear back from you > regarding this document’s readiness for publication. > >>>> > >>>> Note that we have made additional updates to the IANA Considerations > section based on a note that we received from IANA. Please review: > >>>>> The actions have all been completed, but the last three paragraphs > of Section 18 (the IANA Considerations section) need to be removed. The > authors decided to stop sending requesters to the mailing list they’re > referring to in that section and instead send them directly to IANA. (In > fact, Rich is talking about shutting that [email protected] list > down entirely, which is what drew my attention to this.) The note that’s > been pasted into that section is actually an old note that we removed from > the registry as we were performing the actions.Our understanding is that > the section should just read, “This document is entirely about changes to > TLS-related IANA registries.” > >>>> > >>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.txt > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.pdf > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.xml > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.md > >>>> > >>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-diff.html > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-rfcdiff.html (side by > side) > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-auth48diff.html > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-auth48rfcdiff.html (side > by side) > >>>> > >>>> Markdown diffs: > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-diff.html > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-rfcdiff.html (side by > side) > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-auth48diff.html > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-auth48rfcdiff.html > (side by side) > >>>> > >>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, see: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847. > >>>> > >>>> Please review the contents of the document carefully. Contact us with > any further updates or with your approval of the document’s contents in its > current form. We will await approvals from each author prior to moving > forward with formatting updates. > >>>> > >>>> For details of the AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc (including the > two-part approval process), see > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. > >>>> > >>>> Thank you! > >>>> > >>>> Madison Church > >>>> RFC Production Center > >>>> > >>>>> On Nov 17, 2025, at 2:39 PM, Madison Church < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi Joe, > >>>>> > >>>>> Thank you for your reply! We have updated the document accordingly > and have no further questions related to content at this time. > >>>>> > >>>>> Please review the contents of the document carefully. Contact us > with any further updates or with your approval of the document’s contents > in its current form. We will await approvals from each author prior to > moving forward with formatting updates. > >>>>> > >>>>> For details of the AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc (including the > two-part approval process), see > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. > >>>>> > >>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.txt > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.pdf > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.xml > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.md > >>>>> > >>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-diff.html > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-rfcdiff.html (side by > side) > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-auth48diff.html > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-auth48rfcdiff.html (side > by side) > >>>>> > >>>>> Markdown diffs: > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-diff.html > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-rfcdiff.html (side by > side) > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-auth48diff.html > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-auth48rfcdiff.html > (side by side) > >>>>> > >>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847 > >>>>> > >>>>> Thank you! > >>>>> > >>>>> Madison Church > >>>>> RFC Production Center > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Nov 15, 2025, at 8:20 PM, Joseph Salowey <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Attached is an updated markdown file, did we have this in a github > repo as well? Might be easier to make comments and suggest changes through > PRs. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I only made one substantive change to update my Organization from > Venafi to CyberArk. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I also ran fix-lint to remove some of the trailing whitespace so I > can build it. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I also modified the text in comment 5 to apply the "Singular" > option which is what I think is the best. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I didn't find any issues with inclusive language. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Joe > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 4:53 PM Joseph Salowey <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>>>> I'm in the process of document review. Questions answered below. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Joe > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 4:19 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] Note that we have updated the short title, which > appears in the > >>>>>> running header in the PDF output, as follows. Please let us know > any objections. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Original: > >>>>>> (D)TLS IANA Registry Updates > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Current: > >>>>>> TLS and DTLS IANA Registry Updates > >>>>>> --> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [Joe] This looks good to me > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 2) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that > appear in the title) > >>>>>> for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. --> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [Joe]I don't think there are additional keywords > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 3) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We will do the following when we convert the > file to RFCXML: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - Update relevant URLs to be clickable in the HTML and PDF outputs > >>>>>> --> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [Joe] OK > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 4) <!-- [rfced] Because this document updates RFC 8447, please > >>>>>> review the errata reported for RFC 8447 > >>>>>> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/rfc8447) > >>>>>> and let us know if you confirm our opinion that none of them > >>>>>> are relevant to the content of this document. > >>>>>> --> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [Joe] The offending sentence no longer appears in the document > since the IANA action has already been completed. > >>>>>> The registry has be updated with the correct name since TLS 1.3. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 5) <!-- [rfced] In the sentence below, is the intention to have > consensus > >>>>>> to leave one item or multiple items marked? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Original: > >>>>>> The IETF might have consensus to leave an items marked as "N" on the > >>>>>> basis of its having limited applicability or usage constraints. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Perhaps (Singular): > >>>>>> The IETF might have consensus to leave an item marked as "N" on the > >>>>>> basis of the item having limited applicability or usage constraints. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Or (Plural): > >>>>>> The IETF might have consensus to leave items marked as "N" on the > >>>>>> basis of the items having limited applicability or usage > constraints. > >>>>>> --> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [Joe] I don't think it changes the intent of the section. I have > a slight preference for the Singular, but either will do. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 6) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have reordered the values in Table 1 to > reflect > >>>>>> how they are listed in the "TLS ExtensionType Values" registry. > >>>>>> --> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [Joe] Thank you > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 7) <!--[rfced] May we remove this sentence from the end of Section > 14? > >>>>>> This action is already listed in Section 7. > >>>>>> Original: > >>>>>> IANA is requested to rename the "Note" column to "Comment" column in > >>>>>> TLS Exporter Labels registry. > >>>>>> --> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [Joe] Yes > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 8) <!--[rfced] IANA provided the following note when they notified > us that their > >>>>>> actions were complete: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> NOTE: Some text at the end of the IANA Considerations section > concerning request > >>>>>> submission needs to be removed or replaced. Details at the end of > the list of > >>>>>> actions. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Per this note and to reflect what appears in the TLS-related IANA > registries, > >>>>>> we have updated the text as shown below. Please let us know if any > changes are > >>>>>> needed. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Original: > >>>>>> Requests for assignments from the registry's Specification Required > >>>>>> range should be sent to the mailing list described in [This RFC, > >>>>>> Section 16]. If approved, designated experts should notify IANA > >>>>>> within three weeks. For assistance, please contact [email protected]. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Current: > >>>>>> | Note: Requests for registration in the "Specification Required" > >>>>>> | [RFC8126] range should be sent to [email protected] or submitted via > >>>>>> | IANA's application form, per [RFC 9847]. IANA will forward the > >>>>>> | request to the expert mailing list described in [RFC8447], > >>>>>> | Section 17 and track its progress. See the registration > procedure > >>>>>> | table below for more information. > >>>>>> --> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [Joe] This looks good to me > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 9) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have added an expansion for the following > abbreviation > >>>>>> per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide"). Please review each > expansion > >>>>>> in the document carefully to ensure correctness. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> International Data Encryption Algorithm (IDEA) > >>>>>> --> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [Joe] I believe this is correct. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 10) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have updated the following terms to the > form on the > >>>>>> right to match other documents in Cluster 430. Please let us know > any objections. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ciphersuite(s) > cipher suite(s) > >>>>>> code points > codepoints > >>>>>> --> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [Joe] This looks good, Thank you > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 11) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of > the online > >>>>>> Style Guide < > 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. > >>>>>> --> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [Joe] OK will review. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thank you. > >>>>>> Madison Church and Alanna Paloma > >>>>>> RFC Production Center > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Oct 30, 2025, at 4:18 PM, [email protected] wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> *****IMPORTANT***** > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Updated 2025/10/30 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> RFC Author(s): > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Your document has now entered AUTH48. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The document was edited in kramdown-rfc as part of the RPC pilot > test (see > >>>>>> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please review the procedures for AUTH48 using kramdown-rfc: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_instructions_completing_auth48_using_kramdown > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Once your document has completed AUTH48, it will be published as > >>>>>> an RFC. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Files > >>>>>> ----- > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The files are available here: > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.md > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.html > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.pdf > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847.txt > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Diff file of the text: > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-diff.html > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-rfcdiff.html (side by > side) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Diff of the kramdown: > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-diff.html > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9847-md-rfcdiff.html (side > by side) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Tracking progress > >>>>>> ----------------- > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: > >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9847 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please let us know if you have any questions. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thank you for your cooperation, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> RFC Editor > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -------------------------------------- > >>>>>> RFC9847 (draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-15) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Title : IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS > >>>>>> Author(s) : J. Salowey, S. Turner > >>>>>> WG Chair(s) : Joseph A. Salowey, Sean Turner, Deirdre Connolly > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Area Director(s) : Deb Cooley, Paul Wouters > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> <rfc9847.md> > >>> > >> > > > >
-- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
