Hi all,
Please find below the RPC report for June. This report is also available
at https://notes.ietf.org/rpc-report-202606?view
Best regards,
Jean
--
# RFC Production Center Report - June 2026
Previous notes: https://notes.ietf.org/rpc-report-202605#
RPC project roadmap: https://github.com/orgs/rfc-editor/projects/2
## Big Picture
On May 20, the IETF Tools Team and RFC Production Center deployed the
new www.rfc-editor.org website, which has the following features:
* a modern web framework
* professionally designed user interface
* improved search across both full text and metadata
* better performance under load
* far better experience on mobile devices and for users relying on
assistive technology
Also launched was the new publication queue website,
queue.rfc-editor.org, which provides:
* More information about what is happening with the documents
* Opaque and antiquated states have replaced with better and more
descriptions. For example, AUTH48 is now "In Final Review".
* New cluster diagrams that show reference relationships
In addition, subsite errata.rfc-editor.org is a re-implementation of the
errata system (for details, see
https://www.rfc-editor.org/series/rfc-errata/), and
history.rfc-editor.org is a new subsite that houses EIDs, various older
technical reports, and email digests from the early days. This
information was previously found at https://www.rfc-editor.org/history/.
Furthermore, the RPC cut over to its new queue management system, known
as Purple. This transition was just in time as the first five-digit RFC
number (RFC 10002) was assigned the same day, and the old system would
not have been able to handle it. The RPC uses Purple to manage editing
assignments, handle clusters, manage final reviews (formerly AUTH48),
and publish documents. The RPC has successfully published eight RFCs
since the cutover. Queue data from Purple is shared with
queue.rfc-editor.org and datatracker.
## Project Updates
A full list of the RPC's [strategic
transformations](https://notes.ietf.org/rpc-report-202605?view#Strategic-Transformations)
can be found at the end of this report, and each project is tied to one
or more transformations (given in parentheses).
### RPC Retreat
The blog post about the April retreat can be found here:
https://www.ietf.org/blog/rpc-retreat-2026/. In future reports, we'll
cover retreat topics in depth.
### GitHub Roadmap (Reflecting Changing Author Processes AP-2, AP-3)
The RPC is offering an optional AUTH48 process whereby the RPC shares
its proposed edits with authors using a pull request made against the
approved source file in an RPC-created GitHub repo. This GitHub-based
process is currently being offered on limited basis, and the RPC is
accepting 5 documents per month. For details, see the [GitHub
roadmap](https://rpc-wiki.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=rpc_github_roadmap).
The RPC asks authors if they would like to participate when their
documents enter the publication queue via an intake form.
There are currently 31 docs in the queue whose authors have agreed to
participate in this optional process. We are limiting the number of
documents to 5 per month until we have exercised this AUTH48 process
some more. We can accept 5 documents this month.
### Supporting kramdown-rfc as a submission format (Reflecting Changing
Author Processes AP-1)
The RPC is accepting kramdown-rfc files as a submission format on a
limited bases (5 documents per month). Authors can opt in by responding
to the intake form when their document enters the queue.
The RPC will edit these kramdown-rfc files and make them available at
the start of AUTH48. More information about the pilot program can be
found on the [RPC
wiki](https://rpc-wiki.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc).
There are 25 kramdown-rfc documents in the queue; one of which is
currently in AUTH48. We can accept 4 kramdown-rfc documents this month.
### Updates to SVG guidance (Community Requirements CR-3)
[RFC 9896](https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9896) obsoletes RFC 7997
and sets policy for SVG artwork. Current guidance can be found on
[authors.ietf.org](https://authors.ietf.org/diagrams). The RPC is
working with the IETF Tools Team to identify tools updates (i.e.,
xml2rfc, svgcheck, idnits) and drafting new guidance that better
supports accessibility. This accessibility guidance will be added to
authors.ietf.org.
The RPC is researching open-source tools that can create accessible SVG
easily so we can provide recommendations to the community.
This project saw no significant changes since the last report.
### RFCXML vocabulary updates (Community Requirements CR-4)
The RPC has been assessing RFCXML vocabulary issues across multiple
issue trackers and has been moving them to a new issue tracker
(https://github.com/ietf-tools/RFCXML):
* https://github.com/ietf-tools/xml2rfc - the main repo for tools issues
and had been the main repo for vocabulary issues.
* Most of the open issues have been evaluated. We have been working
with the Tools Team to move issues over.
* https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues - 51
open issues.
* We have copied issues from this repo to the RFCXML repo with
pointers to the original discussions.
* https://github.com/rfcseries-wg/new-topics - 28 open issues.
* To be assessed
* https://github.com/jrlevine/draft-rswg-xml2rfcv3-implemented/issues -
4 open issues.
* To be assessed
This project saw no significant changes since the last report.
### Improved queue information (Transparency TR-3, TR-5)
The new queue site, queue.rfc-editor.org, is now live, and it provides:
* Clearer labels, such as "In Progress (First Edit)" rather than "EDIT",
"In Progress (Second Edit)" rather than "RFC-EDITOR", and "In Final
Review" rather than "AUTH48"
* More details including whether a document is part of the kramdown-rfc
or GitHub pilot program
* Visualizations of cluster dependencies
For more details about the labels used, please see
https://queue.rfc-editor.org/about/
### Tooling (T)
#### New Queue Management System: Purple (Process Efficiency PE-3,
Tooling T-2, T-3)
[Purple](https://github.com/ietf-tools/purple) was launched into
production 20 May 2026, and is working well for the RPC team.
The next set of features for Purple will include the creation of queue
statistics reports.
#### New rfc-editor.org Website: Red (T-2)
The new www.rfc-editor.org website, known as
[Red](https://github.com/ietf-tools/red), was launched 20 May 2026.
Based on community feedback, the Tools Team has improved support for
users who do not wish to enable JavaScript.
API changes are documented at
https://github.com/ietf-tools/red/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md and include
using RFC numbers that can be 1-5 digits long without leading zeroes.
The use of trailing slashes in URIs has been made consistent. Redirects
have been put into place, so please ensure that your HTTP client is
configured to follow redirects. If you think a redirect is missing,
please file an issue at https://github.com/ietf-tools/red.
#### New Editing Software: DraftForge (T-1)
[DraftForge](https://draftforge.ietf.org/) is an editing platform that
provides RFCXML validation, output file creation for both RFCXML and
kramdown-rfc source files, GitHub integration, datatracker submission
for I-D authors, and replaces the 20+ checker scripts the RPC used to
run at the command line.
The RPC team is now working in DraftForge, which has moved from beta to
a stable release.
#### xml2rfc and Self-hosted Fonts
Before IETF 126, the RPC will work with the Tools Team to update the
URLs in existing HTML files of RFCs to point to fonts at
static.ietf.org. This will be a surgical edit to the HTML files rather
than a rerendering. This is to fix an HTML formatting issue where bold
text no longer is displayed as bold in Chrome browsers ([The issue at
Chrome was closed as
wontfix](https://issues.chromium.org/issues/447361040)).
This project saw no changes since the last report.
## Document Work Updates and Hot Topics
**Note:** As docs move through the queue, they go through the following
states: intake form processing where author input is required ->
formatting -> reference checking -> first edit, which focuses on content
editing -> second edit, which focuses on open questions from the first
editing pass, IANA Considerations updates, and source code validation ->
Final Review, where authors review the edits and provide their approvals
-> Final Review Done, where documents may wait for their companion
documents to complete their final reviews and where editors run final
checks -> publication on the www.rfc-editor.org website and
announcement. Different editors handle these different states, which is
why documents are listed multiple times below. See the [RFC Publication
Process](https://authors.ietf.org/rfc-publication-process) for more
information.
The updates below are since the [15 May RPC
report](https://notes.ietf.org/rpc-report-202605?view).
Alice
* In progress
* First Edit
* draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization
* Second Edit
* draft-ietf-lamps-keyusage-crl-validation
* Completed
* Second Edit
* 9992 (draft-ietf-rift-kv-tie-structure-and-processing-09)
* 10005 (draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth-24)
* 9997 (draft-ietf-core-yang-sid-pen-06)
Alanna
* In progress
* First Edit:
* draft-ietf-core-groupcomm-bis-18 (C564, Markdown, Final
Review in GitHub, 117 pgs)
* Final Review:
* 9955 - draft-ietf-pquip-hybrid-signature-spectrums-07
* 9971 - draft-ietf-bmwg-mlrsearch-15 (Markdown, Final Review
in GitHub)
* Completed
* First Edit:
* draft-ietf-netmod-system-config-20
* Final Review:
* 9989 - draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-41 (C539)
* 9990 - draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-32 (C539)
* 9991 - draft-ietf-dmarc-failure-reporting-25 (C539)
* 9982 - draft-ietf-calext-jscontact-uid-07
* Note: A new version was submitted to Datatracker while
this document was in Final Review.
* 9992 - draft-ietf-rift-kv-tie-structure-and-processing-09
Madison
* In progress
* First Edit:
* draft-ietf-core-oscore-groupcomm-28 (C564, Markdown/GitHub,
128 pages)
* Final Review:
* 9986 - draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers
* 9988 - draft-ietf-core-href (Markdown/GitHub)
* Final Review - Done:
* 9985 - draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication (waiting for
9986)
* Completed
* First Edit → Second Edit:
* draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-sr-p2mp-18
* Final Review → PUB Checks:
* 9958 - draft-ietf-pquip-pqc-engineers
Sarah
* In progress
* Intake Forms Pending:
* draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update
* draft-ietf-ccamp-layer1-types
* draft-ietf-ccamp-l1csm-yang
* draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang
* draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc9093-bis
* draft-ietf-ccamp-optical-impairment-topology-yang
* draft-ietf-v6ops-claton
* draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage
* draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip (just need author info
confirmed!)
* Format:
* draft-ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement
* draft-ietf-teas-yang-te
* draft-pantos-hls-rfc8216bis
* Final Review
* 9996 - draft-ietf-dispatch-mime-protobuf
* Completed
* Format: 16
* Sent Intake Forms: 18
Rebecca
* In progress
* Second Edit
* draft-ietf-asap-sip-auto-peer-41
* Final Review
* 9970 - draft-ietf-stir-rfc4916-update-07
* 9998 - draft-iab-agews-report-03
* markdown/GitHub
* expedited
* 9978 - draft-ietf-bfd-stability (helping with this one)
* GitHub
* Completed
* Second Edit
* 9998 - draft-iab-agews-report-03
* markdown/GitHub
* expedited
* 9996 - draft-ietf-dispatch-mime-protobuf-07
* GitHub
* 9988 - draft-ietf-core-href-30
* markdown/GitHub
* 9971 - draft-ietf-bmwg-mlrsearch-15
* markdown/GitHub
* Other
* 9978 - draft-ietf-bfd-stability-21
* created repo for Final Review
* Revised repo templates and emails for Final Review in GitHub
Megan
* In progress
* First Editor
* draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-18 (C463)
* AUTH/REF aka Blocked - Author Input Required
* C405 in this state since Sept 2025
* draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm
* draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model
* draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model
* draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm
* draft-ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm
* draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability
* Final Review
* draft-ietf-stir-servprovider-oob-08 / RFC-to-be 9888
* AD set deadline for author to reply: June 12
* Thanks to Russ for helping with updates!
* draft-ietf-cose-merkel-tree-proofs-18 / RFC-to-be 9942 (C557)
* draft-ietf-openpgp-pqc-17 / RFC-to-be 9980
* needs AD approval/review only
* draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr-21 / RFC-to-be 9994
* draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-10 / RFC-to-be 9995
* draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5272bis-11 / RFC-to-be 10002 (C565)
* draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5273bis-11 / RFC-to-be 10003 (C565)
* will await RFC-to-be 9846 (informative reference) so all
3 C565 docs will be delayed.
* draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5274bis-11 / RFC-to-be 10004 (C565)
* Completed
* First Editor
* draft-iab-agews-report-03
* draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-client-server-41 (C463) (GH)
* draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-client-server45 (C463) (GH)
* Thanks to the authors for letting us know in the document
intake form that the above C463 documents were “virtual twins”; this was
very helpful for processing!
* draft-ietf-rats-eat-measured-component (MD/GH)
* Second Review
* draft-ietf-rats-msg-wrap (RFC-to-be 9999)
* Final Review
* draft-ietf-scitt-architecture-22 / RFC-to-be 9943 (C557)
* awaiting cluster companion RFC-to-be 9942
* draft-ietf-netconf-udp-client-server-10 / RFC-to-be 9984 (C463)
* no normative references; can move to publication without
C463 holds
* PUB
* RFC 9965 (draft-ietf-emu-eap-arpa-10)
* RFC 9966 (draft-ietf-emu-eap-bootstrapped-tls-11)
* RFC 9972 (draft-ietf-grow-bmp-bgp-rib-stats-17)
* RFC 9975 (draft-ietf-dnsop-cds-consistency-11)
* RFC 9977 (draft-ietf-opsawg-prefix-lengths-14)
* RFC 9979 (draft-ietf-mailmaint-messageflag-mailboxattribute-14)
* RFC 9981 (draft-ietf-sigrops-manifest-numbers-09)
* RFC 9983 (draft-ietf-lsr-anycast-flag-13)
* RFC 9987 (draft-ietf-sshm-ssh-agent-16)
Kaelin (out of office this week)
Ted
* 14 in progress
* draft-ietf-lisp-geo-20
* draft-ietf-netconf-adaptive-subscription-18
* draft-ietf-oauth-cross-device-security-15
* draft-ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang-26
* draft-ietf-intarea-proxy-config-14
* draft-ietf-cellar-tags-25
* draft-ietf-cats-framework-24
* draft-ietf-oauth-rfc7523bis-11
* draft-ietf-mboned-amt-yang-09
* draft-ietf-grow-nrtm-v4-11
* draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs-19
* draft-ietf-opsawg-pcaplinktype-18
* draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-ecn-08
* draft-ietf-mailmaint-expires-06
* 13 completed since last update
Sandy
* In progress
* First Edit:
* draft-ietf-oauth-browser-based-apps (markdown/GitHub)
* Second Edit:
* draft-ietf-httpbis-safe-method-w-body (GitHub)
* draft-ietf-ntp-over-ptp (GitHub)
* Final Review:
* RFC-to-be 9851 (draft-ietf-tls-tls12-frozen)
* RFC-to-be 9846 (draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis) - markdown
* RFC-to-be 9974 (draft-ietf-bier-oam-requirements)
* RFC-to-be 9997 (draft-ietf-core-yang-sid-pen) - markdown
* Completed
* First Edit:
* draft-ietf-core-yang-sid-pen
* Published (May)
* 8 in new system
* 15 in old system
Karen
* In progress
* Second Edit:
* draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-client-server-41 (C463) (RFC-to-be
10009)
* draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-client-server-45 (C463)
(RFC-to-be 10010)
* Final Review:
* draft-ietf-rats-msg-wrap-23 (RFC-to-be 9999)
* Completed
* First Edit:
* draft-ietf-netconf-http-client-server-33 (C463)
* Second Edit:
* draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-32 (C539) (RFC-to-be 9990)
* draft-ietf-dmarc-failure-reporting-25 (C539) (RFC-to-be 9991)
* draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication-36 (C562) (RFC-to-be
9993)
* draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers-27 (C562) (RFC-to-be 9986)
* Final Review (both docs were published):
* RFC 9967 (draft-ietf-scim-events-16)
* RFC 9993 (draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-haptics-14) (Markdown)
## FYIs
### Stats
There are currently 148 documents in the queue.
In May, 15 documents entered the queue, and 23 RFCs were published.
### Artwork Tip
If you are working with SVG artwork, please review the figures in both
HTML and PDF outputs, and also carefully compare the information in the
SVG figures to that in the ASCII-art figures in the text output to
ensure that they align. This is also an important check if you are using
a tool that converts ASCII-art to SVG (e.g., aasvg).
## Strategic Transformations
The full list of strategic transformations is provided here for reference.
### Productivity
#### Process Efficiency (PE)
1. One editor does many tasks **→** Specialists provide expertise in
document intake, formatting, reference checking. (PE-1)
2. The RPC has no information regarding the authors' intentions that
shaped the creation of the document (e.g., is the document supposed to
be similar to another RFC?), requiring considerable work to figure out
intentions **→** The document comes with as much information as
possible from the authors, thus reducing RPC workload. (PE-2)
3. Editing notes about a document are split across multiple places
(mailing list, ARO style sheet, internal wiki) **→** All editing notes
about a document are in a single, easily accessible place. (PE-3)
4. (Closed) There is lack of a documented process for the rare case when
a document is of such poor editorial quality that it should be returned
to the stream for improvements **→** A documented process that includes
guidance on how the RPC team identifies such a document early in the
process. (PE-4)
5. The RPC's internal procedure documentation conflates copyediting
guidance and tools details, making maintenance difficult **→** modular,
easier-to-maintain procedures for copyediting and tools. (PE-5)
#### Tooling (T)
1. Editing requires lots of time-consuming manual work **→** As much as
possible is automated. (T-1)
2. The production platform is very old and is time-consuming to maintain
**→** Professionally designed and written production platform. (T-2)
3. ADs struggle with finding RPC requests **→** RPC requests are found
on the AD dashboard. (T-3)
#### Community Requirements (CR)
1. RPC does lots of work, some of which may not be required to be done
by the RPC **→** RPC only does the work it needs to do, with clearly
defined limits of the RPC's responsibility for document quality, beyond
which it is the responsibility of the authors. (CR-1)
2. Lots of time-consuming manual work due to sizable RFCXML feature set
**→** Less work due to streamlined RFCXML feature set. (CR-2)
3. Out-of-date and rigid SVG guidance **→** more flexible guidance that
supports accessibility. (CR-3)
4. RFCXML v3 issues spread out in multiple places **→** consolidated
place for all vocab-related issues. (CR-4)
5. The RFC Style Guide (7322bis) is stuck in a perpetual I-D state
because we don't know when we are done **→** Split into an RFC
containing guiding principles and use authors.ietf.org to capture
details. (CR-5)
6. No guidance on accessibility **→** Guidance and training for authors
that helps them make their documents accessible. (CR-6)
### Transparency (TR)
1. The inner workings of the RPC are opaque to the IETF community, which
means that the nature and value of the work is not understood **→**
Inner workings of the RPC are sufficiently transparent for the IETF
community to understand the value of the work. (TR-1)
2. Private communications channels with the community create issues such
as hidden decisions, poor attitude, and repeated questions **→** All
communications with the community are through open channels. (TR-2)
3. Authors lack details about their documents' progress through the
queue **→** A document's progress through the queue is clearer and more
detailed. (TR-3)
4. RPC doesn't have a personal aspect, and is just seen as a black-box
service. The tenure and skills of the team are not known **→** The
community knows the team and their tenure and skills. (TR-4)
5. Current SLA is not fit for purpose **→** An SLA that is fit for
purpose, adapted to the RPC's specific circumstances, and covering
qualitative and quantitative measures. (TR-5)
### Reflecting Changing Author Processes (AP)
1. The RPC does not accept markdown as a submission format **→** The RPC
accepts and edits markdown documents. (AP-1)
2. The RPC uses a shared file system and manual version control **→**
The RPC uses a modern version control system. (AP-2)
3. Authors are frustrated backporting RPC edits to their repos **→**
There are processes and tools that support an author's use of GitHub. (AP-3)
--
rswg mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
