You can take the quotes out or leave ‘em in. You’re call.

spt

> On Jul 1, 2026, at 16:01, Sandy Ginoza <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Eric,
> 
> We removed there reference to RFC 9146.  We also removed a few quotes from 
> around IANA registry titles for consistency with the rest of the document.  
> If you’re open to adding the quotes throughout (per typical RPC editing), 
> please let us know.  
> 
> FYI: We confirmed that the IANA updates are complete.  
> 
> The current files are here: 
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.xml
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.txt
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.pdf
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.html
> 
> Diffs highlighting the most recent updates only: 
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-lastdiff.html
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-lastrfcdiff.html (side by side)
> 
> AUTH48 diffs: 
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-auth48diff.html
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by side)
> 
> Comprehensive diffs: 
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-diff.html
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
> 
> 
> Please review and let us know if any further updates are needed or if you 
> approve the RFC for publication. 
> 
> Thanks,
> Sandy Ginoza
> RFC Production Center 
> 
> 
>> On Jun 30, 2026, at 7:03 PM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2026 at 6:15 PM Sandy Ginoza <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>> Hi Eric, Deb*,
>> 
>> We have updated the document.  
>> It looks like we may have missed this in earlier rounds, but we don’t see an 
>> in-text citation for RFC 9146.  
>> 
>> We don't need one. Let's just remove it.
>> 
>> -Ekr
>> Please review and let us know where one should be included.  
>> 
>> Notes: 
>> - [PRE-RFC9846] has been replaced with [RFC9846] (no links).  The reference 
>> entry to RFC 9846 has been removed. 
>> - While we prefer not to start sentences with I.e., we have left it per your 
>> preference. 
>> 
>> *Deb, please confirm that the updates shown in the diffs below are 
>> acceptable: 
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-ADrfcdiff.html (side by side) 
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-ADdiff.html
>> 
>> Please review and let us know if any additional updates are needed (outside 
>> of the publication date) or if you approve the RFC for publication. 
>> 
>> IANA indicated the updates are complete, but I have not yet confirmed them — 
>> we will let you know if there are any issues.  
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Sandy Ginoza
>> RFC Production Center 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jun 26, 2026, at 10:52 AM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 10:31 PM Sandy Ginoza 
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hi Eric, Deb* (as AD), IANA,
>>> 
>>> Thanks for sending the markdown file along.  We have updated it a bit so 
>>> that we could get output files.  We have a few questions below.  
>>> 
>>> IANA, please see item 5 below.  
>>> 
>>> *Deb, please review and confirm that these updates are acceptable.  We 
>>> recommend reviewing the following diffs:
>>> 
>>> Diffs highlighting the most recent updates only: 
>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-lastdiff.html
>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-lastrfcdiff.html (side by side)
>>> 
>>> The current files are available as follows: 
>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.md
>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.txt
>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.pdf
>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.html
>>> 
>>> AUTH48 diffs: 
>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-auth48diff.html
>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by 
>>> side)
>>> 
>>> Comprehensive diffs: 
>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-diff.html
>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Eric, please review the items below. 
>>> 
>>> An updated markdown file is available at: 
>>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/94ccece457fd37738390a844174a8d74e5ea4638/rfc9846.md
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 1) We updated "The Transcript Hash” to be Section 4.1 — please confirm that 
>>> this is correct.  
>>> 
>>> Previously, Section 4 was nested as follows:
>>> 
>>> 4. Handshake Protocol
>>> 4.1. Key Exchange Messages
>>> 4.1.1. Cryptographic Negotiation
>>> 4.1.2. Client Hello
>>> 4.1.3. Server Hello
>>> 4.1.4. Hello Retry Request
>>> …
>>> 4.4.  Authentication Messages
>>> 4.4.1.  The Transcript Hash
>>> … 
>>> 
>>> In the updated file, kramdown-rfc complained about the nesting, which 
>>> appeared as follows: 
>>> # Handshake Protocol
>>> ### The Transcript Hash
>>> 
>>> Thank you for fixing this.
>>> 
>>> I have reverted your changes of "I.e.," to "That is". I.e., is fine. If you 
>>> believe any copy-edit changes are needed at this stage, can you please flag 
>>> them explicitly as below, rather than making them in the copy.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2) Confirm "non-DHE key key establishment algorithms” is correct (occurs 2x)
>>> 
>>> This is correct.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 3) Should this be “as 0-RTT data on connection 1”?  
>>> 
>>>  … as an attacker may be able to cause the data to be
>>>  processed as 0-RTT data as connection 1 and as 1-RTT data on
>>>  connection 2. 
>>> 
>>> I have corrected this.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 4) To get the outputs, we updated the references to RFC 9846 to be included 
>>> as “PRE-RFC9846” - it will be updated in the XML file prior to publication. 
>>>  Would you be open to not including a self-reference to RFC 9846, and 
>>> including the references in the IANA tables as plain text "[RFC9846]” 
>>> instead - this would be normal handling to avoid self-references. 
>>> 
>>> I can live with this. Deb, Sean?
>>> -Ekr
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

-- 
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to