Alanna,

Thank you for your work on this! A few suggested updates:

   1. Section: Table 2
   OLD: Private Use
   NEW: Reserved for Private Use
   2. Section: Table 2
   OLD: Experimental Use
   NEW: Reserved for Experimental Use
   3. Section: Informative References
   The date on RFC 3307 should be August, not September. Please see
   discussion with Alice Russo about this at
   
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/auth48archive/32tUw1MqlBxfSsHHTg7hVJR0Pig/.
   She ended up using a manual reference instead of relying on bib.ietf.org.

For #1 and #2 in this list, this is to better align with the actual entries
in the registry
https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-multicast-addresses#dynamic-multicast-group-ids.
Alternatively, we could update the registry to match the document, or just
ignore this difference (as it's clear enough that these line up).

Regarding your list of questions:

   1. New title looks great
   2. Keywords: MADCAP, architecture (from IPv6 multicast address
   architecture)
   3. I reviewed the document and agree there are no issues

Cheers,

Nate

On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 1:09 PM <[email protected]> wrote:

> Authors,
>
> While reviewing this document during Final Review, please resolve (as
> necessary) the following questions, which are also in the source file.
>
> 1) <!-- [rfced] Note that we have updated the short title, which appears
> in the running header
> in the PDF output, as follows.
>
> Original:
>  Dynamic IPv6 Mcast Addr Group ID Updates
>
> Current:
>  Dynamic IPv6 Multicast Address Group ID Updates
> -->
>
>
> 2) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear in
> the title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. -->
>
>
> 3) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of the
> online
> Style Guide <
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/#inclusive_language>
> and let us know if any changes are needed.  Updates of this nature
> typically
> result in more precise language, which is helpful for readers.
>
> Note that our script did not flag any words in particular, but this should
> still be reviewed as a best practice.
> -->
>
>
> Thank you.
>
> Alanna Paloma
> RFC Production Center
>
>
> On Jul 31, 2026, at 11:07 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>
> *****IMPORTANT*****
>
> RFC Author(s):
> --------------
>
> Final Review for RFC-to-be 10028
> <draft-ietf-pim-updt-ipv6-dyn-mcast-addr-grp-id>
>
> 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/rfc10028.xml
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028.html
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028.pdf
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028.txt
>
> Diff file of the text:
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028-diff.html
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
>
> Diff of the XML:
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028-xmldiff1.html
>
>
> Tracking progress
> -----------------
>
> Details on the status of your Final Review are here:
>    https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc10028/
>
> Please let us know if you have any questions.
>
> Thank you for your cooperation,
>
> RFC Editor
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC 10028 (draft-ietf-pim-updt-ipv6-dyn-mcast-addr-grp-id)
>
> Title            : Updates to Dynamic IPv6 Multicast Address Group IDs
> Author(s)        : N. Karstens,
>                    D. Farinacci,
>                    M. McBride
> WG Chair(s)      : Stig Venaas, Mike McBride
> Area Director(s) : Jim Guichard, Ketan Talaulikar, Gunter Van de Velde
>
-- 
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to