Re: [auth48] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9274 <draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode-05> for your review

[Karen Moore <[e-mail]>]

Hello Med,

Thank you for your quick reply.  We have updated the files accordingly, including capitalizing “Protocol” and removing “see”.

The updated XML file is here:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274.xml

The updated output files are here:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274.txt
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274.pdf
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274.html

This diff file shows all changes made during AUTH48:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274-auth48diff.html

This diff file shows all changes made to date:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274-diff.html

Note that it may be necessary for you to refresh your browser to view the most recent version. Please review the document carefully to ensure satisfaction as we do not make changes once it has been published as an RFC.

Please contact us with any further updates or with your approval of the document in its current form.  We will await approvals from each author prior to moving forward in the publication process.

For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9274

Best regards,

RFC Editor/kc


> On Jul 18, 2022, at 10:38 AM, <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi RFC Editor, all, 
> 
> Please see inline. 
> 
> Cheers,
> Med
> 
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
>> Envoyé : lundi 18 juillet 2022 19:34
>> À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET <[e-mail]>;
>> [e-mail]
>> Cc : [e-mail]; [e-mail]; alto-
>> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
>> Objet : Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9274 <draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode-05>
>> for your review
>> 
>> Authors,
>> 
>> While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as
>> necessary) the following questions, which are also in the XML
>> file.
>> 
>> 1) <!-- [rfced]  We were unsure if this reference to the ALTO
>> specification was referring to the protocol itself or the document
>> RFC 7285.  To clarify, we suggest the update described below.  If
>> this is acceptable, we may alter a few similar instances
>> throughout the document.
>> 
>> Original:
>>   The cost mode attribute indicates how costs should be
>> interpreted
>>   when communicated in the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization
>>   (ALTO) Protocol [RFC7285].  The base ALTO specification
>> includes a
>>   provision for only two modes:
>> 
>> Suggested:
>>   The cost mode attribute indicates how costs should be
>> interpreted
>>   when communicated as described in "Application-Layer Traffic
>> Optimization
>>   (ALTO) Protocol" [RFC7285], which includes a provision for only
>> two modes:
> 
> [Med] Works for me. 
> 
>> -->
>> 
>> 
>> 2) <!-- [rfced] This document informatively references draft-ietf-
>> alto-path-vector, which will move to AUTH48 in the coming weeks.
>> Please let us know if you would like to delay publication of this
>> document so the two can be published together (and this document
>> can reference the RFC) or if you would prefer for this document to
>> reference draft-ietf-alto-path-vector as a work in progress and be
>> published sooner.
>> -->
> 
> [Med] No need to wait for draft-ietf-alto-path-vector. Thanks.
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 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 or phrases.
>> -->
> 
> [Med] Thanks. 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> 
>> RFC Editor
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 18, 2022, at 10:30 AM, [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/rfc9274.xml
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274.html
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274.pdf
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274.txt
>> 
>> Diff file of the text:
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274-diff.html
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274-rfcdiff.html (side
>> by side)
>> 
>> Diff of the XML:
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274-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/rfc9274.original.v2v3.xml
>> 
>> XMLv3 file that is a best effort to capture v3-related format
>> updates
>> only:
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9274.form.xml
>> 
>> 
>> Tracking progress
>> -----------------
>> 
>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9274
>> 
>> Please let us know if you have any questions.
>> 
>> Thank you for your cooperation,
>> 
>> RFC Editor
>> 
>> --------------------------------------
>> RFC9274 (draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode-05)
>> 
>> Title            : A Cost Mode Registry for the Application-Layer
>> Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Protocol
>> Author(s)        : M. Boucadair, Q. Wu
>> WG Chair(s)      : Jan Seedorf, Mohamed Boucadair, Qin Wu
>> Area Director(s) : Martin Duke, Zaheduzzaman Sarker
>> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
> 
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
>