All, Mahesh’s approval has been noted. We have now received all necessary approvals and consider AUTH48 complete: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9918
As this document is part of Cluster C496, you may track the progress of all documents in this cluster through AUTH48 at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/C496 Note: This document normatively references RFC-to-be 9846, so it will be published at the same time as or after that document. Please let us know if you have any questions. Thank you, Alanna Paloma RFC Production Center > On Jan 22, 2026, at 9:55 AM, Mahesh Jethanandani <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Allana, > > I approve the added 2119/8174 keyword changes. > > Thanks. > >> On Jan 20, 2026, at 11:55 AM, Alanna Paloma <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Authors and Mahesh (AD)*, >> >> *Mahesh - As the AD, please review and approve of the added 2119/8174 >> keyword in the sentence below (Section 1). >> >> Original: >> NOTE: Implementations that support TLS 1.3 >> [I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis] should refer to TLS 1.3 >> [I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis] in Sections 4 and 5 of [RFC7589]. >> >> Current: >> NOTE: Implementations that support TLS 1.3 [RFC9846] >> SHOULD also follow Sections 4 and 5 of [RFC7589]. >> >> See this diff file: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918-auth48diff.html >> >> >> Authors - Thank you for your reply. We have updated the document accordingly. >> >> The files have been posted here (please refresh): >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918.txt >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918.pdf >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918.html >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918.xml >> >> The relevant diff files are posted here: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918-diff.html (comprehensive diff) >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918-auth48diff.html (AUTH48 changes) >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918-auth48rfcdiff.html (AUTH48 >> changes side by side) >> >> Please review the document carefully as documents do not change once >> published as RFCs. >> >> We will await any further changes you may have and approvals from each >> author and *Mahesh prior to moving forward in the publication process. >> >> Please see the AUTH48 status page for this document here: >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9918 >> >> Thank you, >> Alanna Paloma >> RFC Production Center >> >>> On Jan 20, 2026, at 7:15 AM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Alana, >>> >>> Hi! >>> >>> More below.. and my new ones follow: >>> >>> 1) Minor nit: >>> >>> OLD: >>> >>> data, which is also known as 0-RTT data. It also updates "netconf- >>> tls", the IANA-registered port number entry, to refer to this >>> >>> NEW: >>> >>> data, which is also known as 0-RTT data. It also updates >>> "netconf-tls", the IANA-registered port number entry, to refer to this >>> >>> 2) Tweak to make it match others: >>> >>> OLD: >>> >>> This document specifies that >>> NETCONF implementations that support TLS 1.3 MUST NOT use early data. >>> >>> NEW: >>> >>> This document specifies that >>> NETCONF implementations that support TLS 1.3 or later MUST NOT use early >>> data. >>> >>> spt >>> >>>> On Jan 16, 2026, at 15:34, Alanna Paloma <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Russ, >>>> >>>> Thank you for your reply. >>>> >>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918.xml >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918.txt >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918.html >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918.pdf >>>> >>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here: >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918-diff.html (comprehensive diff) >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9918-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>>> >>>> Please review the document carefully and contact us with any further >>>> updates you may have. Note that we do not make changes once a document is >>>> published as an RFC. >>>> >>>> We will await approvals from each party listed on the AUTH48 status page >>>> below prior to moving this document forward in the publication process. >>>> >>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9918 >>>> >>>> Thank you, >>>> Alanna Paloma >>>> RFC Production Center >>>> >>>>> On Jan 16, 2026, at 11:02 AM, Russ Housley <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Dear RFC Editor: >>>>> >>>>>> 1) <!--[rfced] As [RFC9846] was cited twice in this sentence, >>>>>> we have removed the second instance. Please review and let us know >>>>>> if you prefer otherwise. >>>>>> >>>>>> Original: >>>>>> | NOTE: Implementations that support TLS 1.3 >>>>>> | [I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis] should refer to TLS 1.3 >>>>>> | [I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis] in Sections 4 and 5 of [RFC7589]. >>>>>> >>>>>> Current: >>>>>> | NOTE: Implementations that support TLS 1.3 [RFC9846] >>>>>> | should refer to TLS 1.3 in Sections 4 and 5 of [RFC7589]. >>>>>> --> >>>>> >>>>> The proposed rewording looks fine to me. >>> >>> Can we tweak this note to be: >>> >>> NOTE: Implementations that support TLS 1.3 [RFC9846] >>> SHOULD also follow Sections 4 and 5 of [RFC7589]. >>> >>>>>> 2) <!--[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. >>>>>> >>>>>> Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) >>>>>> --> >>>>> >>>>> The looks fine to me. >>> >>> ditto >>> >>>>>> 3) <!-- [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. >>>>>> --> >>>>> >>>>> I do not see any concerns. >>> >>> ditto >>> >>>>> Russ >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > Mahesh Jethanandani > [email protected] > > > > > > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
