[auth48] Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9956 <draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-33> for your review

[Greg White <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Megan!

Thanks all for your reviews and quick responses. 

-Greg


On 5/5/26, 11:03 AM, "Megan Ferguson" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:


Ruediger,


Got it! As all approvals have now been received (see links below), we have updated this document’s status to “AUTH48-DONE”. We will move it and its companion document (RFC-to-be 9957) forward in the publication process at this time.


The AUTH48 status page is available here:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9956 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9956>


The AUTH48 cluster information is available here:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/C350 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/C350>


Thank you all for your time and attention during AUTH48!


Megan Feguson
RFC Production Center




> On May 5, 2026, at 12:54 AM, [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Megan,
> 
> just to make sure I respond to the correct mail: I approve to publication of the document as is.
> 
> Regards, Ruediger
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Megan Ferguson <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Gesendet: Montag, 4. Mai 2026 20:47
> An: Greg White <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>; Geib, Rüdiger <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Cc: Gorry Fairhurst <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> Betreff: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9956 <draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-33> for your review
> 
> Hi Greg (and *Ruediger),
> 
> Thanks for the careful review! We have rolled this small change and updates to the date into the current version of the file. Please refresh to see at the links below.
> 
> We have also updated your status to “Approved” at the AUTH48 status page (see below).
> 
> Our current files are posted here (please refresh):
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956.txt <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956.txt>
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956.pdf <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956.pdf>
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956.html <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956.html>
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956.xml <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956.xml>
> 
> The diff files (encompassing changes from both of the above) are posted here (please refresh):
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-diff.html <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-diff.html>
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-rfcdiff.html <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-rfcdiff.html> (side by side)
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-auth48diff.html <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-auth48diff.html>
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-auth48rfcdiff.html <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-auth48rfcdiff.html> (side by side)
> 
> Please review the document in its current form carefully as we do not make changes once it is published as an RFC.
> 
> *Ruediger - we see you previously sent:
> 
>> [RG] I agree with all other changes accepted by Greg and Thomas.
> 
> Please reply with an overt approval of the document in its current form (to clarify if you approve it in total or were just approving those specific changes) or with any further updates you may have. We will await word from you prior to moving this document forward in the publication process.
> 
> Note: Because this document references RFC-to-be 9957, we will await that document’s completion of AUTH48 as well prior to moving to publication.
> 
> The AUTH48 status page is available here:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9956 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9956>
> 
> The AUTH48 cluster information is available here:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/C350 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/C350>
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Megan Feguson
> RFC Production Center
> 
>> On May 1, 2026, at 4:47 PM, Greg White <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>> 
>> I did a top-to-bottom review of the current 9956 and found one issue. In the first sentence of section 6.5, I see one instance of "DS" that was not changed to "Diffserv"
>> 
>> Once that is fixed, I approve moving the document forward.
>> 
>> -Greg
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 4/30/26, 2:16 PM, "Megan Ferguson" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Gorry and Thomas,
>> 
>> 
>> Thank you for your replies. We have updated the AUTH48 status page of this document to reflect your approvals. We will await approvals from each listed party prior to moving this document forward in the publication process.
>> 
>> 
>> The AUTH48 status page is available here:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9956 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9956> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9956> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9956&gt;>
>> 
>> 
>> The AUTH48 cluster information is available here:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/C350 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/C350> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/C350> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/C350&gt;>
>> 
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> 
>> 
>> Megan Feguson
>> RFC Production Center
>> 
>> 
>>> On Apr 29, 2026, at 1:32 AM, Gorry Fairhurst <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 27/04/2026 20:00, Megan Ferguson wrote:
>>>> AD/Gorry - Just a reminder to please review/approve the updates to Section 7.2 (described in response to Question #21 below) viewable in the following diff(s):
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-auth48diff.html <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-auth48diff.html> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-auth48diff.html> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-auth48diff.html&gt;>
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-auth48rfcdiff.html <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-auth48rfcdiff.html> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-auth48rfcdiff.html> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9956-auth48rfcdiff.html&gt;> (side by side)
>>>> ---
>>> 
>>> I confirm I have re-read the new Sect 7.2, and this reads OK to me,
>>> 
>>> Gorry
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>