Re: [auth48] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9283 <draft-carpenter-rfced-iab-charter-09> for your review

[Rebecca VanRheenen <[e-mail]>]

Hi Brian,

Thank you for your reply. The only open question is the following one. No updates were needed for the other questions.

>> 3) <!-- [rfced] Would it be helpful to clarify "This is no longer
>> necessary"? We ask because this phrasing might be interpreted as meaning
>> (1) that the RFC Editor will no longer have a liaison member to the IAB or
>> (2) that the RFC Editor can have a liaison member even though it's not
>> necessary.
> 
> I don't believe that we intend to *forbid* such a liaison member - so
> personally I think the current wording is correct. Lars? Mirja?
> 
>> Original:
>>    Also, RFC 2850 states that the RFC Editor appoints a liaison member to
>>    the IAB. This is no longer necessary.
>> Perhaps:
>>    Also, RFC 2850 states that the RFC Editor appoints a liaison member to
>>    the IAB. This will no longer occur.
>> -->


We’ll wait for a conclusion regarding this text and then ask for your final approval before moving forward.

Thank you,
RFC Editor/rv



> On Jun 18, 2022, at 2:04 PM, Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> (Added IAB to CC's.)
> 
> All looks good to me. Answers below:
> 
> On 18-Jun-22 15:55, [e-mail] wrote:
>> Brian,
>> While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary)
>> the following questions, which are also in the XML file.
>> 1) <!-- [rfced] The submitted XML file includes "General" as the
>> <area>. However, we do not see an area listed in datatracker. See
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-carpenter-rfced-iab-charter/.
>> Please confirm that the <area> should be "General".
>> -->
> 
> Yes please.
> 
>> 2) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear in the
>> title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. -->
>> 3) <!-- [rfced] Would it be helpful to clarify "This is no longer
>> necessary"? We ask because this phrasing might be interpreted as meaning
>> (1) that the RFC Editor will no longer have a liaison member to the IAB or
>> (2) that the RFC Editor can have a liaison member even though it's not
>> necessary.
> 
> I don't believe that we intend to *forbid* such a liaison member - so
> personally I think the current wording is correct. Lars? Mirja?
> 
>> Original:
>>    Also, RFC 2850 states that the RFC Editor appoints a liaison member to
>>    the IAB. This is no longer necessary.
>> Perhaps:
>>    Also, RFC 2850 states that the RFC Editor appoints a liaison member to
>>    the IAB. This will no longer occur.
>> -->
>> 4) <!-- [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 terms or phrases.-->
> 
> I see nothing.
> 
> Thanks!
>   Brian
> 
>> Thank you.
>> RFC Editor
>> On Jun 17, 2022, at 8:32 PM, [e-mail] wrote:
>> *****IMPORTANT*****
>> Updated 2022/06/17
>> 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/rfc9283.xml
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9283.html
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9283.pdf
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9283.txt
>> Diff file of the text:
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9283-diff.html
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9283-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
>> Diff of the XML:
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9283-xmldiff1.html
>> The following file is provided to facilitate creation of your own
>> diff files of the XML.  This XMLv3 file is a best effort to capture v3-related format updates only:
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9283.form.xml
>> Tracking progress
>> -----------------
>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9283
>> Please let us know if you have any questions.
>> Thank you for your cooperation,
>> RFC Editor
>> --------------------------------------
>> RFC9283 (draft-carpenter-rfced-iab-charter-09)
>> Title            : IAB Charter Update for RFC Editor Model
>> Author(s)        : B. Carpenter, Ed.
>> WG Chair(s)      :
>> Area Director(s) :