IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [auth48] [AD] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9466 <draft-ietf-pim-assert-packing-12> for your review

Sarah Tarrant <starrant@amsl.com> Fri, 06 October 2023 14:05 UTC

Return-Path: <starrant@amsl.com>
X-Original-To: auth48archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: auth48archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35BB2C15154F; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 07:05:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.906
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.906 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ahOB4mV1yEt7; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 07:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c8a.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E812C16B5A5; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 07:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ADED424B44B; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 07:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SpQAtmucQykN; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 07:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2600:1700:8f1d:4000:743f:bd1f:f2f0:bf87]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E729424B42B; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 07:05:25 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.700.6\))
From: Sarah Tarrant <starrant@amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMMESsxGh=hR0Bfo6g_Xf6ZZymcG5krGzeR7Kx7r=HVL0k-yOA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2023 09:05:14 -0500
Cc: Michael McBride <michael.mcbride@futurewei.com>, pim-chairs@ietf.org, RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, auth48archive@rfc-editor.org, Yisong Liu <liuyisong@chinamobile.com>, pim-ads@ietf.org, zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn, stig@venaas.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B16CC07F-E4C7-4A0A-8EFC-FDA9DA067EE0@amsl.com>
References: <ZRr8Pb7IU4Js6ibb@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <172EDE0F-4D21-47F6-B3C6-D959CDB935A0@amsl.com> <CAMMESsxGh=hR0Bfo6g_Xf6ZZymcG5krGzeR7Kx7r=HVL0k-yOA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.700.6)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/auth48archive/keTxIm6wiJi4D7gYRXOwEOuIxXQ>
Subject: Re: [auth48] [AD] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9466 <draft-ietf-pim-assert-packing-12> for your review
X-BeenThere: auth48archive@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Archiving AUTH48 exchanges between the RFC Production Center, the authors, and other related parties" <auth48archive.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/auth48archive>, <mailto:auth48archive-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/>
List-Post: <mailto:auth48archive@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:auth48archive-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/auth48archive>, <mailto:auth48archive-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2023 14:05:30 -0000

Hello Toerless and Alvaro,

Thank you for your replies. We have updated the document accordingly.

Please review the document carefully to ensure satisfaction as we do not make changes once it has been published as an RFC. Contact us with any further updates or with your approval of the document in its current form. We will await approvals from each author prior to moving forward in the publication process.

Updated XML file:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9466.xml

Updated output files:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9466.html
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9466.txt
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9466.pdf

Diff file showing all changes made during AUTH48:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9466-auth48diff.html

Comprehensive Diffs:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9466-diff.html
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9466-rfcdiff.html (side-by-side diff)

Note that it may be necessary for you to refresh your browser to view the most recent version. 

For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9466

Thank you,

RFC Editor/st

> On Oct 6, 2023, at 6:52 AM, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On October 5, 2023 at 2:11:08 PM, Sarah Tarrant wrote:
> 
> Hi Sarah!
> 
>> *Alvaro, as AD, please review the second bullet in Section 3.3.1 and let us
>> know if you approve. This change is best viewed in this diff file:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9466-auth48diff.html.
> 
> Yes, it's ok to take out the normative recommendation.
> 
> Just a nit:  implementations don't "want" anything, they are
> programmed to do something.
> 
> s/an implementation wants to send/an implementation sends
> 
> Thanks!!
> 
> Alvaro.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email