[auth48] [IANA #1453844] [IANA] Re: RFC-to-be 9986 draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers for your review

[Amanda Baber via RT <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

This update is complete:

https://www.iana.org/assignments/bfd-parameters

thanks,
Amanda

On Mon Jun 08 15:57:19 2026, [e-mail] wrote:
> Hello IANA,
> 
> For Address 8 in the "BFD Authentication Types" Registry
> (https://www.iana.org/assignments/bfd-parameters/bfd-
> parameters.xhtml), please update "SHA1" to "SHA-1" in the BFD
> Authentication Type Name column according to the edited document.
> 
> Current:
> Optimized SHA1 Meticulous Keyed ISAAC Authentication
> 
> Updated:
> Optimized SHA-1 Meticulous Keyed ISAAC Authentication
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> Madison Church
> RFC Production Center
> 
> > On Jun 8, 2026, at 10:47 AM, Madison Church <[e-mail]-
> > editor.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ashesh,
> >
> > Thank you for your reply! We have noted your approval here:
> > https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc9986/.
> >
> > Now that we have all author approvals, we will move forward with IANA
> > updates.
> >
> > Thank you!
> >
> > Madison Church
> > RFC Production Center
> >
> >> On Jun 5, 2026, at 9:04 PM, Ashesh Mishra <[e-mail]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks, Jeff. I reviewed the latest and it all looks good to me.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Ash
> >>
> >>
> >> Ashesh Mishra
> >> Head of Client Solutions
> >>
> >> [phone]
> >> www.aalyria.com
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 5, 2026 at 6:30 PM Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >> +ashesh at corrected address
> >>
> >> On 6/4/26 17:00, Madison Church wrote:
> >>> Hi Sonal,
> >>>
> >>> Apologies for missing your earlier mail! We have noted your
> >>> approval and updated your email and affiliation. See
> >>> https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc9986/.
> >>>
> >>> Updated files are here:
> >>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986.txt
> >>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986.pdf
> >>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986.html
> >>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986.xml
> >>>
> >>> Diffs:
> >>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986-diff.html
> >>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986-rfcdiff.html (side by
> >>> side)
> >>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986-auth48diff.html
> >>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986-auth48rfcdiff.html
> >>> (side by side)
> >>>
> >>> Once we receive approval from Ashesh, we will ask IANA to update
> >>> the "BFD Authentication Types" registry. Afterwards, this document
> >>> (and RFC-to-be 9985) will move forward in the publication process.
> >>>
> >>> Thank you!
> >>>
> >>> Madison Church
> >>> RFC Production Center
> >>>
> >>>> On Jun 4, 2026, at 3:38 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani
> >>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Madison,
> >>>>
> >>>> Sonal did respond with an approval and asked for her contact
> >>>> information to be updated. Did you see it?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>>
> >>>> p.s. Let me ping Ashesh.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Jun 4, 2026, at 9:19 AM, Madison Church <[e-mail]-
> >>>>> editor.org> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Mahesh,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for your reply! We have noted your approval here:
> >>>>> https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc9986/.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Once we receive approvals from Ashesh and Sonal, we will move
> >>>>> this document forward in the publication process.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Madison Church
> >>>>> RFC Production Center
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Jun 3, 2026, at 7:07 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani
> >>>>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Madison,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am not sure if I sent my approval already, but here it is, in
> >>>>>> case I missed sending it
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Jun 2, 2026, at 12:00 PM, Madison Church <[e-mail]-
> >>>>>>> editor.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Alan, *Ketan,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> *Ketan - We have noted your approval for moving RFC 8341 to the
> >>>>>>> Normative References section.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Alan - Thank you for your reply! We have updated the document
> >>>>>>> per your response and noted your approval on the Final Review
> >>>>>>> (formerly AUTH48) status page; see https://queue.rfc-
> >>>>>>> editor.org/final-review/rfc9986/.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh):
> >>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986.txt
> >>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986.pdf
> >>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986.html
> >>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986.xml
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Updated diff files have been posted here:
> >>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986-diff.html
> >>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986-rfcdiff.html (side
> >>>>>>> by side)
> >>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986-auth48diff.html
> >>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9986-auth48rfcdiff.html
> >>>>>>> (side by side)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Once we receive approval from Mahesh, Sonal, and Ashesh, we
> >>>>>>> will move this document forward in the publication process.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Madison Church
> >>>>>>> RFC Production Center
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Jun 2, 2026, at 11:27 AM, Alan DeKok <[e-mail]>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On May 29, 2026, at 4:47 PM, Madison Church
> >>>>>>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> 17) <!-- [rfced] For the "[ISAAC_]" reference, we recommend
> >>>>>>>>>>> changing the citation
> >>>>>>>>>>> tag since "[ISAAC]" and "[ISAAC_]" may be easily confused.
> >>>>>>>>>>> May we update
> >>>>>>>>>>> "[ISAAC_]" to "[ISAAC+]" or "[ISAAC-Plus]"?
> >>>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>> This question to be answered by Alan and the SEC-ADs.
> >>>>>>>>> [rfced] We will wait for further guidance from Alan before
> >>>>>>>>> proceeding with any updates for the "[ISAAC_]" reference.
> >>>>>>>> This should be "[ISAAC-Plus]" for clarity.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> [rfced] After further review, we have decided to use
> >>>>>>>>> "sequence number" and "secret key" in this document for
> >>>>>>>>> consistency across RFC 5880 and RFC-to-be 9985 (this excludes
> >>>>>>>>> instances where the terms are paired with another noun, e.g.,
> >>>>>>>>> "Sequence Number field"). Please let us know any objections.
> >>>>>>>> This is fine.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Meticulous Keyed ISAAC
> >>>>>>>>>>> Meticulous keyed ISAAC
> >>>>>>>>>> The forms I see these in are paired to the sha-1 and md-5
> >>>>>>>>>> forms of the mode.  We are looking for consistency for those
> >>>>>>>>>> pairings.  The capitalization for keyed can match the other
> >>>>>>>>>> instances.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Meticulous Keyed ISAAC Keyed
> >>>>>>>>>>> [Note: Is the second "Keyed" correct here? There are 4
> >>>>>>>>>>> instances.]
> >>>>>>>>>> These instances look like a search and replace issue.  I
> >>>>>>>>>> believe the intention here is that each of these instances
> >>>>>>>>>> is intended to be "Meticulous Keyed ISAAC, ISAAC format".
> >>>>>>>>>> This should be audited by Alan.
> >>>>>>>>> [rfced] We will wait for further guidance from Alan before
> >>>>>>>>> making the updates as described above for "Meticulous Keyed
> >>>>>>>>> ISAAC Keyed". We have updated all other terms for
> >>>>>>>>> consistency.
> >>>>>>>> Yes.  The 4 instances can be changed to "Meticulous Keyed
> >>>>>>>> ISAAC, ISAAC format".
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Alan DeKok.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Mahesh Jethanandani
> >>>>>> [e-mail]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Mahesh Jethanandani
> >>>> [e-mail]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >