+ashesh at corrected address
On 6/4/26 17:00, Madison Church wrote:
Hi Sonal,
Apologies for missing your earlier mail! We have noted your approval and
updated your email and affiliation. See
https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc9986/.
Updated files are here:
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
Diffs:
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 Ashesh, we will ask IANA to update the "BFD
Authentication Types" registry. Afterwards, this document (and RFC-to-be 9985) will
move forward in the publication process.
Thank you!
Madison Church
RFC Production Center
On Jun 4, 2026, at 3:38 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Madison,
Sonal did respond with an approval and asked for her contact information to be
updated. Did you see it?
Thanks
p.s. Let me ping Ashesh.
On Jun 4, 2026, at 9:19 AM, Madison Church <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Mahesh,
Thank you for your reply! We have noted your approval here:
https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc9986/.
Once we receive approvals from Ashesh and Sonal, we will move this document
forward in the publication process.
Thank you!
Madison Church
RFC Production Center
On Jun 3, 2026, at 7:07 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Madison,
I am not sure if I sent my approval already, but here it is, in case I missed
sending it
Thanks.
On Jun 2, 2026, at 12:00 PM, Madison Church <[email protected]>
wrote:
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.
Mahesh Jethanandani
[email protected]
Mahesh Jethanandani
[email protected]
--
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
