Re: [auth48] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9273 <draft-irtf-nwcrg-nwc-ccn-reqs-09> for your review

[Hitoshi Asaeda <[e-mail]>]

Hi, again.

I don't know which version is better, but I'd like to give another XML file that eliminates space between two references. (The previous one is formatted with, for example, "... the NC benefits [5] [6]", and this one is with ".. the NC benefits [5][6]".)
Please use either one of the two.

Regards,

Hitoshi


> On Jul 20, 2022, at 12:29, Hitoshi Asaeda <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Dear RFC Editor,
> 
> We, authors of this document, updated the XML file to address all of your suggestions and comments.
> I attached the modified XML file, as well as replied inlines as below.
> Please confirm whether we completed the editorial revision.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
>> On Jul 19, 2022, at 14:47, [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] Please ensure that the guidelines listed in Section 2.1 of RFC 5743
>> have been adhered to in this document. -->
> 
> We confirmed RFC 5743 and add a sentence, "This document was read and reviewed by all the active research group members.", in Introduction.
> 
>> 2) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear in the
>> title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. -->
> 
> Keywords are added.
> 
>> 3) <!--[rfced] We see a number of author-inserted comments in the XML file
>> for this document. We are unsure if these have been resolved. Please review
>> and let us know if these can be deleted or if they need to be addressed.
>> -->
> 
> We removed almost every comment.
> 
>> 4) <!--[rfced] Regarding the decisions to use numeric references, i.e.,
>> [1]-[40], and to sort them alphabetically by their anchor attributes 
>> (the usage of symrefs="no" and sortrefs="yes" in the original XML): 
>> The effect is that they are not cited in numeric order in the document 
>> (for example, [16] and [19] are the first citations). At this point, 
>> which option do you prefer?
>> A) leave the references as they are. 
>> B) change to sortRefs="false" and manually reorder the references within
>> the references section so that they are cited in numeric order
>> Example (for illustrative purposes only; further reordering would be required):
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9273-refs1.txt
>> C) change to symRefs="true" (while keeping sortRefs="true") so that the anchor 
>> is used for the name, e.g., [Matsuzono17].
>> Example: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9273-refs2.txt
>> -->
> 
> Thanks. We fixed.
> 
>> 5) <!--[rfced] This reference is listed twice. The second one 
>> seems to be in error, so may it be removed? This would yield
>> one update within the document as shown below.
>> 
>> Koetter03:
>> [20] Koetter, R. and M. Medard, "An Algebraic Approach to
>> Network Coding", IEEE/ACM Trans. on Networking, vol. 11,
>> no 5, Oct. 2003.
>> 
>> Koetter08:
>> [38] Koetter, R. and F. Kschischang, "An algebraic approach to
>> network coding", IEEE Trans. Netw. vol.11, no.5, October
>> 2003.
>> 
>> In Section 1:
>> 
>> OLD: coherent NC and noncoherent NC [38] [39].
>> NEW: coherent NC and noncoherent NC [20] [39].
>> -->	 
> 
> Thanks. We fixed.
> 
>> 6) <!-- [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.
>> -->
> 
> We did.
> 
> Thank you very much for your careful review.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Hitoshi
> 
> 
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> 
>> RFC Editor/ap/ar
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 18, 2022, [e-mail] wrote:
>> 
>> *****IMPORTANT*****
>> 
>> Updated 2022/07/18
>> 
>> 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/rfc9273.xml
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9273.html
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9273.pdf
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9273.txt
>> 
>> Diff file of the text:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9273-diff.html
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9273-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
>> 
>> Diff of the XML: 
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9273-xmldiff1.html
>> 
>> The following files are provided to facilitate creation of your own 
>> diff files of the XML. 
>> 
>> Initial XMLv3 created using XMLv2 as input:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9273.original.v2v3.xml 
>> 
>> XMLv3 file that is a best effort to capture v3-related format updates 
>> only: 
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9273.form.xml
>> 
>> 
>> Tracking progress
>> -----------------
>> 
>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9273
>> 
>> Please let us know if you have any questions. 
>> 
>> Thank you for your cooperation,
>> 
>> RFC Editor
>> 
>> --------------------------------------
>> RFC9273 (draft-irtf-nwcrg-nwc-ccn-reqs-09)
>> 
>> Title : Network Coding for Content-Centric Networking / Named Data Networking: Considerations and Challenges
>> Author(s) : K. Matsuzono, H. Asaeda, C. Westphal
> <rfc9273-final.xml>