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

[Mirja Kuehlewind <[e-mail]>]

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) :
> 
>