Re: [auth48] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9492 <draft-ietf-lsr-rfc8920bis-06> for your review

["Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <[e-mail]>]

Folks -

Changes are fine with the following exceptions:

1)Section 5

"Standard Application Identifier Bit Mask:  Optional set of bits,
      where each bit represents a single standard application.  Bits are
      defined in the "Link Attribute Application Identifiers" registry,
      which is defined in [RFC8919]."

The reference should be updated to be the new RFC9479.

2)Section 5

"Bit 1 (S-bit):  Segment Routing Policy.  This is data plane
         independent."

This format does not match the same text in RFC9479(to be) which is currently shown as:

" S-bit:  Set to specify SR Policy (this is data plane independent)."

My personal preference is to keep the parentheses.

3)Section 15

Please be consistent in the use of "Link State Routing Working Group" vs "LSR WG" as found in Section 9 of new RFC9479.

4)Section 16.1

Given that RFC8919 is obsoleted by RFC9479, I would think that the reference should be updated to RFC9479.

   Les

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2023 5:50 PM
> To: Peter Psenak (ppsenak) <[e-mail]>; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
> <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9492 <draft-ietf-lsr-rfc8920bis-06> for your
> review
> 
> *****IMPORTANT*****
> 
> Updated 2023/09/18
> 
> 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/rfc9492.xml
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9492.html
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9492.pdf
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9492.txt
> 
> Diff file of the text:
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9492-diff.html
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9492-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
> 
> Diff of the XML:
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9492-xmldiff1.html
> 
> 
> Tracking progress
> -----------------
> 
> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9492
> 
> Please let us know if you have any questions.
> 
> Thank you for your cooperation,
> 
> RFC Editor
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC9492 (draft-ietf-lsr-rfc8920bis-06)
> 
> Title            : OSPF Application-Specific Link Attributes
> Author(s)        : P. Psenak, Ed., L. Ginsberg, W. Henderickx, J. Tantsura, J. Drake
> WG Chair(s)      : Acee Lindem, Christian Hopps
> Area Director(s) : Alvaro Retana, John Scudder, Andrew Alston
>