Re: [auth48] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9311 <draft-ietf-shmoo-hackathon-08> for your review

[[e-mail]]

Author,

While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary) the following questions, which are also in the XML file.

1) <!--[rfced] Note that we have updated the short title, which appears in
the running header in the PDF output, as follows.

Original:
   ietf-hackathon

Current:
   IETF Hackathon
-->


2) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear in the title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. -->


3) <!--[rfced] May we shorten the following citation names for easier
readability in the text and for consistency in the References
section? 

[IETF-RUNNING-CODE-SPONSOR] —> [RUNNING-CODE-SPONSOR]
[IETF-IRTF-IAB-PRIVACY-STATEMENT] —>  [PRIVACY-STATEMENT]

Perhaps:
   Hackathon sponsorship is available at different levels as part of
   being an IETF [RUNNING-CODE-SPONSOR].

   The Hackathon complies with the IETF/IRTF/IAB Privacy Statement
   [PRIVACY-STATEMENT].
-->


4) <!--[rfced] Please clarify how the expenses are covered. Do expenses come out of the communications and operations budget or are the expenses approved/supported by the Director of Communications and Operations?

Original:
   Expenses have been covered by the IETF LLC, Director of Communications and
   Operations.

Perhaps:
A) Expenses have been approved by the IETF LLC, Director of Communications and
   Operations.

or 

B) Expenses have been covered by the IETF LLC, which oversees the communications 
   and operations budget.
-->


5) <!-- [rfced] Per the "Inclusive Language" portion of the online Style
Guide <https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/#inclusive_language>,
we updated "whiteboard" to "dry erase board". Please let us know of any
concerns.

Original:
   A whiteboard or shared notes tablet, e.g., [HEDGEDOC], at tables 
   facilitates sharing of information within the team. 

Current:
   A dry erase board or shared notes tablet, e.g., [HEDGEDOC], at tables 
   facilitates sharing of information within the team. 
 -->


6) <!--[rfced] Per RFC 7942 ("Improving Awareness of Running Code: The
Implementation Status Section"), may we remove the Implementation
Status section? -->


7) <!--[rfced] Regarding the references to email aliases, may these addresses simply appear within the body of the document (instead of in the References section) as follows? Also, please note that we checked with the Secretariat and apparently "[e-mail]" is an outdated email address; they suggested that we use "[e-mail]" instead.

Original:
   The [EMAIL-ALIAS] was created and is maintained by the Secretariat.

Perhaps:
   The email alias <[e-mail]> was created and is 
   maintained by the Secretariat.

Original:
   Best-effort support is available via email to [TICKET].

NEW:
   Best-effort support is available via email to <[e-mail]>.
-->


Thank you.

RFC Editor/ap/kc


On Aug 31, 2022, at 4:21 PM, [e-mail] wrote:

*****IMPORTANT*****

Updated 2022/08/31

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/rfc9311.xml
  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9311.html
  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9311.pdf
  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9311.txt

Diff file of the text:
  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9311-diff.html
  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9311-rfcdiff.html (side by side)

Diff of the XML: 
  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9311-xmldiff1.html

XMLv3 file that is a best effort to capture v3-related format updates 
only: 
  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9311.form.xml


Tracking progress
-----------------

The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
  https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9311

Please let us know if you have any questions.  

Thank you for your cooperation,

RFC Editor

--------------------------------------
RFC9311 (draft-ietf-shmoo-hackathon-08)

Title            : Running an IETF Hackathon
Author(s)        : C. Eckel
WG Chair(s)      : Suresh Krishnan, Mallory Knodel

Area Director(s) : Lars Eggert