Hi Andy, As AD, please review Issue #16 (https://github.com/rfc-editor-drafts/FinalReview-rfc10006/issues/16) and let us know how to proceed.
After other updates are finalized, we will also ask for approval for some changes that are above editorial. Thank you, Rebecca VanRheenen RFC Production Center > On Jun 20, 2026, at 3:48 AM, Sreekanth Narayanan > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Rebecca, > > Thank you for adding me as a collaborator and for all the queries! > > I've replied to all issues except #29 (Ready for Final review) with my > comments. I've closed 4 issues that seem informational and I'm OK with the > changes. > > I've also added comments in the RPC Edits PR where necessary. Please take a > look. > > Thanks > Sreekanth > > On Tuesday, June 16th, 2026 at 6:33 AM, [email protected] > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> *****IMPORTANT***** >> >> RFC Author(s): >> -------------- >> >> Your document has now entered Final Review (formerly AUTH48). >> >> Final Review is being handled in GitHub as part of the GitHub pilot test >> (see >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=rpc-github-phase-0-pilot-test). >> >> Your document is available for review at: >> https://github.com/rfc-editor-drafts/FinalReview-rfc10006 >> >> Please do the following: >> >> a) accept your invitations to join the repo as collaborators. We need GitHub >> usernames for Kaustubh and Sreekanth in order to send invites. We have >> already >> sent invites to Cullen (author), Andy (AD), Marc (document shepherd), and >> Jean (WG chair). We can also send an invite to Gonzalo (WG chair) if a GitHub >> username is provided. >> >> b) see the README for details on the Final Review process: >> https://github.com/rfc-editor-drafts/FinalReview-rfc10006/blob/Approved/README.md >> >> c) review the edits in the RPC-edits pull request: >> https://github.com/rfc-editor-drafts/FinalReview-rfc10006/pulls >> >> Note: The diff in the 'Files Changed' view in the RPC-edits pull request may >> be difficult to read because some text was moved and deleted (e.g., removed >> Appendix A, switched order of subsections in References section so that >> Normative comes before Informative, moved the Acknowledgements section to the >> correct location). If you need a cleaner diff, please review the diff files >> provided in the README (especially the alt-diff). >> >> d) address the issues: >> https://github.com/rfc-editor-drafts/FinalReview-rfc10006/issues >> >> Once the content is stable in GitHub, we will provide the updated XML file >> and the output files for review and approval. >> >> You and your coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties >> (e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing >> your approval. >> >> Once the document has been reviewed and approved by all of the authors, >> it will be published as an RFC. If an author is no longer available, >> there are several remedies; see the Unavailable Authors section >> (https://authors.ietf.org/rfc-publication-process#unavailable-authors). >> >> Details on the status of your Final Review are here: >> https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc10006/ >> >> Please let us know if you have any questions. >> >> Thank you for your cooperation, >> >> RFC Production Center >> >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC 10006 (draft-ietf-asap-sip-auto-peer) >> >> Title : Automatic Peering for SIP Trunks >> Author(s) : K. Inamdar, >> S. Narayanan, >> C. Jennings >> WG Chair(s) : Jean Mahoney, Gonzalo Salgueiro >> Area Director(s) : Charles Eckel, Andy Newton >> > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
