Hi all, This update is complete:
https://www.iana.org/assignments/bfd-parameters thanks, Amanda On Mon Jun 08 15:57:19 2026, [email protected] wrote: > Hello IANA, > > For Address 8 in the "BFD Authentication Types" Registry > (https://www.iana.org/assignments/bfd-parameters/bfd- > parameters.xhtml), please update "SHA1" to "SHA-1" in the BFD > Authentication Type Name column according to the edited document. > > Current: > Optimized SHA1 Meticulous Keyed ISAAC Authentication > > Updated: > Optimized SHA-1 Meticulous Keyed ISAAC Authentication > > Thank you! > > Madison Church > RFC Production Center > > > On Jun 8, 2026, at 10:47 AM, Madison Church <[email protected] > > editor.org> wrote: > > > > Hi Ashesh, > > > > Thank you for your reply! We have noted your approval here: > > https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc9986/. > > > > Now that we have all author approvals, we will move forward with IANA > > updates. > > > > Thank you! > > > > Madison Church > > RFC Production Center > > > >> On Jun 5, 2026, at 9:04 PM, Ashesh Mishra <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> 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] > >>>>> editor.org> 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] > >>>>>>> editor.org> 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]
