Thanks, Jeff. I reviewed the latest and it all looks good to me. Thanks, Ash
*Ashesh Mishra* Head of Client Solutions +1 (213) 300-0156 www.aalyria.com On Fri, Jun 5, 2026 at 6:30 PM Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote: > +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]
