All, We have now received all necessary approvals and consider Final Review complete: https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc10028/
Thank you for your attention and guidance during the Final Review process. We will move this document forward in the publication process at this time. Best regards, Alanna Paloma RFC Production Center > On Aug 5, 2026, at 6:59 AM, Nate Karstens <[email protected]> wrote: > > Alanna, > > Looks great, thanks again! > > Approved. > > Nate > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2026 at 11:08 PM Alanna Paloma <[email protected]> > wrote: > Hi Authors, > > Thank you for your replies. We have noted approvals from Mike and Dino on the > Final Review status page: > https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc10028/ > > Additionally, the files have been updated as requested. > > The files have been posted here (please refresh): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028.xml > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028.txt > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028.pdf > > The relevant diff files have been posted here: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028-diff.html (comprehensive diff) > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028-auth48diff.html (Final Review > changes) > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc10028-auth48rfcdiff.html (Final Review > changes side by side) > > Please review the document carefully and contact us with any further updates > you may have. Note that we do not make changes once a document is published > as an RFC. > > We will await approvals from each party listed on the Final Review status > page prior to moving this document forward in the publication process. > > Thank you, > Alanna Paloma > RFC Production Center > > > On Aug 1, 2026, at 4:06 AM, Nate Karstens <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Alanna, > > > > Thank you for your work on this! A few suggested updates: > > • > > Section: Table 2 > > OLD: Private Use > > NEW: Reserved for Private Use > > • Section: Table 2 > > OLD: Experimental Use > > NEW: Reserved for Experimental Use > > • 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: > > • > > New title looks great > > • Keywords: MADCAP, architecture (from IPv6 multicast address > > architecture) > > • 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]
