Alan, *Ketan, *Ketan - We have noted your approval for moving RFC 8341 to the Normative References section.
Alan - Thank you for your reply! We have updated the document per your response and noted your approval on the Final Review (formerly AUTH48) status page; see https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc9986/. The files have been posted here (please refresh): https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986.txt https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986.pdf https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986.xml Updated diff files have been posted here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986-diff.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986-rfcdiff.html (side by side) https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986-auth48diff.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by side) Once we receive approval from Mahesh, Sonal, and Ashesh, we will move this document forward in the publication process. Thank you! Madison Church RFC Production Center > On Jun 2, 2026, at 11:27 AM, Alan DeKok <[email protected]> wrote: > > On May 29, 2026, at 4:47 PM, Madison Church <[email protected]> > wrote: >>>> 17) <!-- [rfced] For the "[ISAAC_]" reference, we recommend changing the >>>> citation >>>> tag since "[ISAAC]" and "[ISAAC_]" may be easily confused. May we update >>>> "[ISAAC_]" to "[ISAAC+]" or "[ISAAC-Plus]"? >>>> --> >>> This question to be answered by Alan and the SEC-ADs. >> >> [rfced] We will wait for further guidance from Alan before proceeding with >> any updates for the "[ISAAC_]" reference. > > This should be "[ISAAC-Plus]" for clarity. > >> [rfced] After further review, we have decided to use "sequence number" and >> "secret key" in this document for consistency across RFC 5880 and RFC-to-be >> 9985 (this excludes instances where the terms are paired with another noun, >> e.g., "Sequence Number field"). Please let us know any objections. > > This is fine. > >>>> Meticulous Keyed ISAAC >>>> Meticulous keyed ISAAC >>> The forms I see these in are paired to the sha-1 and md-5 forms of the >>> mode. We are looking for consistency for those pairings. The >>> capitalization for keyed can match the other instances. >>>> Meticulous Keyed ISAAC Keyed >>>> [Note: Is the second "Keyed" correct here? There are 4 instances.] >>> These instances look like a search and replace issue. I believe the >>> intention here is that each of these instances is intended to be >>> "Meticulous Keyed ISAAC, ISAAC format". This should be audited by Alan. >> >> [rfced] We will wait for further guidance from Alan before making the >> updates as described above for "Meticulous Keyed ISAAC Keyed". We have >> updated all other terms for consistency. > > Yes. The 4 instances can be changed to "Meticulous Keyed ISAAC, ISAAC > format". > > Alan DeKok. > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
