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

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Mirja. I think we can leave it as-is then.

Regards
    Brian Carpenter

On 22-Jun-22 21:38, Mirja Kuehlewind wrote:
> Yes, I agree with Brian as the IAB or RPC could still decide to establish a liaisons, I prefer the original wording.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
>> On 21. Jun 2022, at 16:33, Rebecca VanRheenen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> 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) :
>>
>>
>