Approve ready to go
Grzegorz Piotr Orchel executive director GGO Trust On Wed, 15 Jul 2026 at 01:01, Kent Watsen via auth48archive < [email protected]> wrote: > RFC Editor, thank you! > > Before providing comments, I'm confused as to why I'm provided comments > this way, as opposed via GitHub. At least, I thought that, when invited to > the GitHub repo, that's what was going to occur. > > I reviewed the side-by-side diff, and the text/pdf/html formats, and have > the following comments: > > > 1. Everywhere (capitalization insensitive) > - "RESTCONF client" vs "RESTCONF-client" (with hyphen) > - "RESTCONF server" vs "RESTCONF-server" (with hyphen) > - There is nearly equal number of instances of each of these forms > - Should one form be used throughout? > > 2. In both Section 2.3 and Section 3.3: > - OLD: > - WG Web: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/netconf> > - NEW: > - WG Web: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/netconf > - Notes: > - Please see > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9907#appendix-B > > 3. In both Section 2.3 and Section 3.3: > - Given that some RFCs numbers were updated, the list of imported > YANG modules (e.g., import ietf-yang-types) is no longer sorted by > RFC-number. > - This is a convention of my own creation. > - I like the "import" statements to be order for readability. > - YANG-processors are insensitive to order. > > 4. In Section 4.1 and Section 4.2: > - The last sentence of the 2nd paragraph likely should be updated > per this message: > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/OfrCjSq5GohPGFO-sBEJQEHBh7c/ > - Note that there is a typo in Med's message: "NEW/NEW" was meant > to be "OLD/NEW" > > 5. In Section 2.1.2.3 and Section 3.1.2.4: > - In the tree-diagram, a few lines print the type (i.e., "string") > way over near the Right-column. > - It looks kind of strange. > - Recommend, if you can, removing some of the SPACE characters so > those lines look more like the others around them. > > > > This review does not respond to any of the 21 instances of the "[rfced]" > comments in the XML text. The message received below says that another > email will be sent containing them. I will wait to receive that email > before replying to them. Oh wait, I just noticed that there are 22 GitHub > Issues listed here: > https://github.com/rfc-editor-drafts/FinalReview-rfc10011/issues. Should > I instead respond to the issues on GitHub? > > > PS: thank you for fixing the RFC-numbering issue last week! > > Kent // author > > > > > On Jul 13, 2026, at 2:04 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > *****IMPORTANT***** > > RFC Author(s): > -------------- > > Final Review for RFC-to-be 10011 > <draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-client-server> > > Your document is now available for Final Review (previously AUTH48). Once > it has been > reviewed and approved by you and all coauthors, 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). > > You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties > (e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing > your approval. > > Planning your review > --------------------- > > Please review the following aspects of your document: > > * RFC Editor questions > > Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor > that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as > follows: > > <!-- [rfced] ... --> > > These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email. > > * Changes submitted by coauthors > > Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your > coauthors. We assume that if you do not speak up that you > agree to changes submitted by your coauthors. > > * Content > > Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot > change once the RFC is published. Please pay particular attention to: > - IANA considerations updates (if applicable) > - contact information > - references > > * Copyright notices and legends > > Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in > RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions > (TLP – https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). > > * Semantic markup > > Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements of > content are correctly tagged. For example, ensure that <sourcecode> > and <artwork> are set correctly. See details at > <https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>. > > * Formatted output > > Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the > formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is > reasonable. Please note that the TXT will have formatting > limitations compared to the PDF and HTML. > > > Submitting changes > ------------------ > > To submit changes, please reply to this email using 'REPLY ALL' as all > the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The parties > include: > > * your coauthors > > * [email protected] (the RPC team) > > * other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g., > IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the > responsible ADs, and the document shepherd). > > * [email protected], which is an archival mailing list > to preserve discussion about the document while in the RPC editorial > queue; it is not an active discussion list: > > * More info: > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc > > * The archive itself: > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/ > > * Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt out > of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive matter). > If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that you > have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded, > [email protected] will be re-added to the CC list and > its addition will be noted at the top of the message. > > You may submit your changes in one of two ways: > > An update to the provided XML file > — OR — > An explicit list of changes in this format > > Section # (or indicate Global) > > OLD: > old text > > NEW: > new text > > You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an explicit > list of changes, as either form is sufficient. > > We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that seem > beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of text, > and technical changes. Information about stream managers can be found in > the FAQ. Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream manager. > > > Approving for publication > -------------------------- > > To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email stating > that you approve this RFC for publication. Please use 'REPLY ALL', > as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval. > > > Files > ----- > > The files are available here: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10011.xml > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10011.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10011.pdf > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10011.txt > > Diff file of the text: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10011-diff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10011-rfcdiff.html (side by side) > > Diff of the XML: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10011-xmldiff1.html > > > Tracking progress > ----------------- > > Details on the status of your Final Review are here: > https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc10011/ > > Please let us know if you have any questions. > > Thank you for your cooperation, > > RFC Editor > > -------------------------------------- > RFC 10011 (draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-client-server) > > Title : A YANG Data Model for RESTCONF Clients and Servers > Author(s) : K. Watsen > WG Chair(s) : Kent Watsen, Per Andersson > Area Director(s) : Mohamed Boucadair, Mahesh Jethanandani > > > -- > auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
-- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
