Re: [auth48] [C468] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9368 <draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation-14> for your review

[David Schinazi <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alanna,

Eric and I spent some time reviewing the document and we'd like to make
some minor changes. Here's a diff from your version to what we'd prefer:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=https://quicwg.github.io/version-negotiation/auth48/draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation.txt&url1=https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt

Would you be able to make those changes please?

Thanks,
David

On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 9:00 AM Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Eric,
>
> This is a reminder that we await your review and approval of this document
> prior moving it forward in the publication process.
>
> The files are here:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.pdf
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.html
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.xml
>
> The relevant diff files are posted here:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-diff.html (comprehensive diff)
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-auth48diff.html (all AUTH48
> changes)
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastdiff.html (htmlwdiff diff
> between last version and this)
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastrfcdiff.html (rfcdiff
> between last version and this)
>
> This page shows the AUTH48 status of your document:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
>
> Best regards,
> RFC Editor/ap
>
> > On May 4, 2023, at 8:40 AM, Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Eric,
> >
> > Just a reminder that we await your review and approval prior to moving
> this document forward in the publication process.
> >
> > The files are here:
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.pdf
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.html
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.xml
> >
> > The relevant diff files are posted here:
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-diff.html (comprehensive
> diff)
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-auth48diff.html (all AUTH48
> changes)
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastdiff.html (htmlwdiff
> diff between last version and this)
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastrfcdiff.html (rfcdiff
> between last version and this)
> >
> > This page shows the AUTH48 status of your document:
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >
> > Best regards,
> > RFC Editor/ap
> >
> >> On Apr 26, 2023, at 4:31 PM, Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Yee. I have now finished subcerts and am moving onto this. I should
> have completed an initial review this week.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 11:05 AM Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >> Hi Eric,
> >>
> >> Just a reminder that we await word from you regarding this document's
> readiness for publication as an RFC.
> >>
> >> The files are here:
> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.pdf
> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.html
> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.xml
> >>
> >> The relevant diff files are posted here:
> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-diff.html (comprehensive
> diff)
> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-auth48diff.html (all AUTH48
> changes)
> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastdiff.html (htmlwdiff
> diff between last version and this)
> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastrfcdiff.html (rfcdiff
> between last version and this)
> >>
> >> This page shows the AUTH48 status of your document:
> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> RFC Editor/ap
> >>
> >>> On Apr 7, 2023, at 12:39 PM, Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Eric,
> >>>
> >>> This is friendly reminder that we await your review and approval of
> the updated files.
> >>>
> >>> The files have been posted here (please refresh):
> >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.pdf
> >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.html
> >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.xml
> >>>
> >>> The relevant diff files are posted here:
> >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-diff.html (comprehensive
> diff)
> >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-auth48diff.html (all
> AUTH48 changes)
> >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastdiff.html (htmlwdiff
> diff between last version and this)
> >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastrfcdiff.html (rfcdiff
> between last version and this)
> >>>
> >>> This page shows the AUTH48 status of your document:
> >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>>
> >>> Thank you,
> >>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>
> >>>> On Mar 21, 2023, at 9:58 AM, Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Eric,
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you for letting us know. We’ve noted this delay on the AUTH48
> status page:
> >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>>>
> >>>> We’ll check in the week after IETF 116 if we don’t hear back from you
> first.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Mar 21, 2023, at 9:15 AM, Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks. At this point I am preparing for IETF and will likely not
> get to this till after Yokohama.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 9:14 AM Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi Eric,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is another friendly reminder that we await your review and
> approval of the updated files before continuing with the publication
> process.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh):
> >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.pdf
> >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.html
> >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.xml
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The relevant diff files are posted here:
> >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-diff.html (comprehensive
> diff)
> >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-auth48diff.html (all
> AUTH48 changes)
> >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastdiff.html (htmlwdiff
> diff between last version and this)
> >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastrfcdiff.html
> (rfcdiff between last version and this)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This page shows the AUTH48 status of your document:
> >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you,
> >>>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mar 14, 2023, at 11:11 AM, Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Eric,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This is a friendly reminder that we await your review and approval
> of the updated files before continuing with the publication process.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh):
> >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.pdf
> >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.html
> >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.xml
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The relevant diff files are posted here:
> >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-diff.html
> (comprehensive diff)
> >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-auth48diff.html (all
> AUTH48 changes)
> >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastdiff.html
> (htmlwdiff diff between last version and this)
> >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastrfcdiff.html
> (rfcdiff between last version and this)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This page shows the AUTH48 status of your document:
> >>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thank you,
> >>>>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Mar 7, 2023, at 7:58 PM, Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you. I will try to look at it next week.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 6:29 PM Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Hi David,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you for your approval; it has been noted on the AUTH48
> status page:
> >>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> We will await Eric’s approval before moving forward with the
> publication process.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you,
> >>>>>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Mar 7, 2023, at 4:12 PM, David Schinazi <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thank you so much Alanna. I approve publication of the document.
> >>>>>>>> David
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 3:01 PM Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi David,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> We have updated the document as requested and posted the revised
> files here (please refresh):
> >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.pdf
> >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.html
> >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.xml
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The relevant diff files are posted here:
> >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-diff.html
> (comprehensive diff)
> >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-auth48diff.html (all
> AUTH48 changes)
> >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastdiff.html
> (htmlwdiff diff between last version and this)
> >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastrfcdiff.html
> (rfcdiff between last version and this)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Please review and let us know if any additional updates are
> needed or if you approve the RFC for publication.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This page shows the AUTH48 status of your document:
> >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thank you,
> >>>>>>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mar 6, 2023, at 2:49 PM, David Schinazi <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thank you Alanna!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I just did my final full readthrough and found one last issue.
> In Section 2.3 (Compatible Version Negotiation), a change to the fifth
> paragraph unintentionally changes the meaning. Here is a crisper phrasing:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> CURRENT:
> >>>>>>>>> For instance, if the Negotiated Version requires that the
> 5-tuple remain stable for the entire handshake (as QUIC version 1 does),
> then both endpoints need to validate the 5-tuple of all Handshake packets,
> including the converted first flight.
> >>>>>>>>> FIXED:
> >>>>>>>>> For instance, if the Negotiated Version requires that the
> 5-tuple remain stable for the entire handshake (as QUIC version 1 does),
> then both endpoints need to validate the 5-tuple of all packets received
> during the handshake, including the converted first flight.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thank you,
> >>>>>>>>> David
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 12:21 PM Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Hi David,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> We have fixed that nit. The update files are here (please
> refresh):
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.pdf
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.html
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.xml
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The relevant diff files are posted here:
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-diff.html
> (comprehensive diff)
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-auth48diff.html (all
> AUTH48 changes)
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastdiff.html
> (htmlwdiff diff between last version and this)
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastrfcdiff.html
> (rfcdiff between last version and this)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> This page shows the AUTH48 status of your document:
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thank you,
> >>>>>>>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Mar 6, 2023, at 11:28 AM, David Schinazi <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Alanna,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the updates. I've found a missing parenthesis. In
> Section 3 (Version Negotiation), the second paragraph needs a parenthesis
> before the final colon:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> CURRENT:
> >>>>>>>>>> The contents of Version Information are shown below (using the
> notation from Section 1.3 of [QUIC]:
> >>>>>>>>>> FIXED:
> >>>>>>>>>> The contents of Version Information are shown below (using the
> notation from Section 1.3 of [QUIC]):
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>> David
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 8:36 AM Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Zahed,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your approval. We have noted it on the AUTH48
> status page:
> >>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> We will await approvals from Davis and Eric prior to moving
> this document forward in the publication process.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you,
> >>>>>>>>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 4, 2023, at 1:20 PM, Zaheduzzaman Sarker <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Approved.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks all for working on this publication.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> //Zahed
> >>>>>>>>>>> From: Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, March 4, 2023 2:17:04 AM
> >>>>>>>>>>> To: David Schinazi <[e-mail]>; Zaheduzzaman
> Sarker <[e-mail]>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Cc: RFC Errata System <[e-mail]>; Eric
> Rescorla <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>;
> [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <
> [e-mail]>; [e-mail] <
> [e-mail]>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AD] [C468] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9368
> <draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation-14> for your review
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi David and Zahed (AD)*,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> *Zahed - Please review and approve of the added text in
> Section 2 and the updated text in Section 5 in the diff file below.
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastdiff.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> David - Thank you for your reply and for contacting IANA to
> update the registry. We have updated the files as you requested.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh):
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.pdf
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.html
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.xml
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The relevant diff files are posted here:
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-diff.html
> (comprehensive diff)
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-auth48diff.html
> (all AUTH48 changes)
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastdiff.html
> (htmlwdiff diff between last version and this)
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastrfcdiff.html
> (rfcdiff between last version and this)
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> This page shows the AUTH48 status of your document:
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 2, 2023, at 6:15 PM, David Schinazi <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Alanna!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I contacted IANA about the capitalization and they've updated
> the registry to say "Error negotiating version” instead of “Error
> Negotiating Version” in order to match other entries in that registry.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I did a pass on the document and found some changes I'd like
> to make. Here is a diff between our version and yours (we're on the left
> and you're the right)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=https://quicwg.github.io/version-negotiation/auth48/draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation.txt&url2=https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Can you tweak your copy to match the one on the left please?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> (you can ignore the differences in the reference links at the
> end, that's a tooling issue)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> David
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 3:45 PM Alanna Paloma <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi David,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your reply.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> We have made “Chosen Version” lowercase in the Abstract and
> have capitalized “Original Version” and “Negotiated Version” outside of the
> Abstract and Introduction.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we have capitalized “Error Negotiating Version”
> in Section 10.2 to match the IANA registry.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh):
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.pdf
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.xml
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The relevant diff files are posted here:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-diff.html
> (comprehensive diff)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-auth48diff.html
> (all AUTH48 changes)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastdiff.html
> (htmlwdiff diff between last version and this)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-lastrfcdiff.html
> (rfcdiff between last version and this)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> We will await approvals from each party listed on the AUTH48
> status page below prior to moving this document forward in the publication
> process.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 1, 2023, at 11:22 AM, David Schinazi <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Alanna.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Since we capitalized "Chosen Version", can we also
> capitalize "Original Version" and "Negotiated Version" please? On that note
> please do not capitalize any of these in the Abstract or Introduction,
> since the terms aren't yet defined at that point and they're used in a more
> vague fashion at that point.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't worry about requesting changes from IANA, they've
> already fixed the typo (RFC Editor is CC'ed on that thread).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> David
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 12:56 PM Alanna Paloma <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi David,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your reply. We have updated as requested.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that, once we have received all approvals, we will ask
> IANA to update the "QUIC Transport Error Codes” registry to have “Error
> negotiating version” (instead of “Error Negotiating Version”).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.xml
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.pdf
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-diff.html
> (comprehensive diff)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-auth48diff.html
> (AUTH48 changes)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 AUTH48
> status page below prior to moving this document forward in the publication
> process.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 24, 2023, at 10:40 AM, David Schinazi <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your work on this document! Responses to your
> questions are inline.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> David
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 4:42 PM <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Authors,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve
> (as necessary) the following questions, which are also in the XML file.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) <!--[rfced] FYI: Section 10.2. We have updated the
> "Description" text
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> below to match the text in the IANA "QUIC Transport Error
> Codes"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> registry (i.e., updated "Error negotiating version" to
> "Error
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> negotiation version").
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Value:  0x11
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Code:  VERSION_NEGOTIATION_ERROR
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Description:  Error negotiating version
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Status:  permanent
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Specification:  This document
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Current:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Value:  0x11
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Code:  VERSION_NEGOTIATION_ERROR
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Description:  Error negotiation version
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Status:  permanent
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Specification:  RFC 9368
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The change from "Error negotiating version" to "Error
> negotiation version" was a typo made by IANA. I've emailed them about it to
> have them fix the registry and CCed you. Please revert the change to the
> document as the correct description is "Error negotiating version".
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) <!--[rfced] Throughout the text, the following
> terminology appears to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be used inconsistently. Please review these occurrences and
> let
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> us know if/how they may be made consistent.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Chosen Version vs. chosen version (when not "Chosen
> Version field")
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's use "Chosen Version" to match "Partially Deployed
> Versions" and "Fully Deployed Versions" (see below).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Retry vs. retry (when not "Retry packet")
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC 9000 (which defines Retry) seems to always capitalize
> Retry, so let's do that here too.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In addition, may we capitalize these terms as follows:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Handshake packet" (instead of "handshake packet")
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   [Note: this change will match use in the companion
> document and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>    will be consistent with the capitalization of the other
> packet
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>    names.]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Partially Deployed Versions" (instead of
> "partially-deployed versions")
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   [Note: this change will match how "Fully Deployed
> Versions" appears
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>    in the text.]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds good to me.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that our script did not flag any words in particular,
> but this should still
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be reviewed as a best practice.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not aware of any further needed changes due to
> inclusive language.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Editor/ap/kc
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 23, 2023, at 4:40 PM, [e-mail]
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *****IMPORTANT*****
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Updated 2023/02/23
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Author(s):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Instructions for Completing AUTH48
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your document has now entered 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
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> available as listed in the FAQ (
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *  [e-mail] (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).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *  [e-mail], which is a new archival
> mailing list
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>  to preserve AUTH48 conversations; 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,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>    [e-mail] 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/rfc9368.xml
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.pdf
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.txt
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Diff file of the text:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-diff.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-rfcdiff.html
> (side by side)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Diff of the XML:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368-xmldiff1.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> XMLv3 file that is a best effort to capture v3-related
> format updates
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> only:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9368.form.xml
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tracking progress
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9368
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let us know if you have any questions.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your cooperation,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Editor
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC9368 (draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation-14)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Title            : Compatible Version Negotiation for QUIC
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Author(s)        : D. Schinazi, E. Rescorla
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> WG Chair(s)      : Matt Joras, Lucas Pardue
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Area Director(s) : Martin Duke, Zaheduzzaman Sarker
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>