Hi Sarah, The markdown file can be found on GitHub here: https://github.com/tfpauly/privacy-proxy/blob/main/draft-ietf-intarea-proxy-config.md
The author GitHub IDs are: @tfpauly, @yaroslavros, and @ddragana. Best, Tommy > On May 19, 2026, at 9:19 AM, Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Yaroslav, > > Thank you for your reply and the heads-up about the new version. > > While we await AD approval on those updates, I have a couple followup > questions regarding the Markdown and GitHub pilots: > > A) Please provide a self-contained kramdown-rfc file so that we can proceed > with markdown. > > B) Please also provide all author, AD, and/or document shepherd GitHub > usernames so that we can include all approvers in the repo. > > Sincerely, > Sarah Tarrant > RFC Production Center > >> On May 19, 2026, at 8:29 AM, Yaroslav Rosomakho <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Hello Sarah, >> >> As discussed, we just published revision -14 to correct the identified >> issue. We have also added an Acknowledgement section. >> >> Please see the answers to your questions inline below. >> >> Thank you! >> >> Best Regards, >> Yaroslav >> >> >> On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 9:03 PM Sarah Tarrant >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Yaroslav, >> >> Thank you for letting us know. I'll be on the lookout for the version update >> notification. >> >> Sincerely, >> Sarah Tarrant >> RFC Production Center >> >>> On May 12, 2026, at 2:59 PM, Yaroslav Rosomakho <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello Sarah, >>> >>> Thank you for the detailed guidance. >>> >>> We will publish one more revision to the datatracker to resolve a minor >>> contradiction spotted recently. We will let you know once that's done and >>> the document is ready for RPC. >>> >>> -yaroslav >>> >>> >>> On Mon, May 11, 2026 at 8:32 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? >>> >> >> Yes, the Abstract is accurate and all the mentioned sections are 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, >>> WG style guide, etc.? If so, please provide a pointer to that information >>> (e.g., "This document's terminology should match DNS terminology in >>> RFC 9499." or "This document uses the style info at >>> <https://httpwg.org/admin/editors/style-guide>."). >>> * Is there a general pattern of capitalization or formatting of terms that >>> editors can follow (e.g., "Field names should have initial capitalization." >>> or "Parameter names should be in double quotes." or "<tt/> should be used >>> for token names." etc.)? >>> >>> >> >> This document extends the Provisioning Domains specification (RFC8801) and >> should be stylistically consistent with it. >> >>> 3) Please carefully review the entries and their URLs in the >>> References section 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. >>> >> >> All the references are reasonable and there should have no issues. >> >> >>> >>> 4) Is there any text that requires special handling? For example: >>> * Are there any sections that were contentious when the document was >>> drafted? >>> * Are any sections that need to be removed before publication marked as >>> such >>> (e.g., Implementation Status sections (per RFC 7942)). >>> * Are there any instances of repeated text/sections that should be edited >>> the same way? >>> >> >> Section 1.3 ("Note to the RFC Editor") and "Discussion Venues" need to be >> removed. >> >> JSON examples must remain valid JSONs. >> >>> >>> 5) This document uses one or more of the following text styles. >>> Are these elements used consistently? >>> >>> * fixed width font (<tt/> or `) >>> * italics (<em/> or *) >>> * bold (<strong/> or **) >>> >>> >> >> I believe we are consistent. >> >> >>> 6) 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. >>> >> >> We'd be happy to participate. >> >>> >>> 7) Would you like to participate in the RPC Pilot Test for completing >>> AUTH48 in >>> GitHub? If so, please let us know and provide all author, AD, and/or >>> document >>> shepherd GitHub usernames. For more information about this experiment, see: >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=rpc-github-phase-0-pilot-test. >>> >> >> We'd be happy to participate. >> >>> >>> 8) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while editing >>> this >>> document? >>> >>>> On May 11, 2026, at 10:29 AM, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> Author(s), >>>> >>>> Your document draft-ietf-intarea-proxy-config-13, 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 >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the sole use >>> of the intended recipient and may contain confidential, non-public, and/or >>> privileged material. Use, distribution, or reproduction of this >>> communication by unintended recipients is not authorized. If you received >>> this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender and then >>> delete all copies of this communication from your system. >> >> >> >> >> This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the sole use >> of the intended recipient and may contain confidential, non-public, and/or >> privileged material. Use, distribution, or reproduction of this >> communication by unintended recipients is not authorized. If you received >> this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender and then >> delete all copies of this communication from your system. > >
-- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
