Hi Tommy and Yaroslav,

Perfect! Thank you so much.

Sincerely,
Sarah Tarrant
RFC Production Center

> On May 19, 2026, at 11:21 AM, Tommy Pauly <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 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]

Reply via email to