Sorry peeping an update. Don't understand what's going on. I'm not trying
to be pushy, I just want to know how much maybe hunger or and or processes
and such.


Corinne

On Wed, Feb 25, 2026, 03:23 <[email protected]> wrote:

> Send auth48archive mailing list submissions to
>         [email protected]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via email, send a message with subject or
> body 'help' to
>         [email protected]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         [email protected]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of auth48archive digest..."Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Gyan and Shraddha - Fwd: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9929
> <draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-11> for your review
>       (Peter Psenak)
>    2. Re: [AD] [IANA] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9907
> <draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-28> for your review
>       (Qin Wu)
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Peter Psenak <[email protected]>
> To: Acee Lindem <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <
> [email protected]>, "Hegde, Shraddha" <[email protected]>
> Cc: "Dan Voyer (davoyer)" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <
> [email protected]>, lsr-chairs <[email protected]>, Yingzhen Qu <
> [email protected]>, "[email protected]" <
> [email protected]>, "[email protected]" <
> [email protected]>, RFC Editor <[email protected]>,
> Alice Russo <[email protected]>, "Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil)"
> <[email protected]>
> Bcc:
> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 09:07:10 +0100
> Subject: [auth48] Re: Gyan and Shraddha - Fwd: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9929
> <draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-11> for your review
> Hi Acee,
>
> On 24/02/2026 23:55, Acee Lindem wrote:
> > Thanks Clarence and Dan for approving...
> >
> > Peter, Shraddha, and Gyan,
>
> I have done it back on 19th:
>
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9929
>
> thanks,
> Peter
>
>
> > Please review and approve.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Acee
> >
> >> On Feb 24, 2026, at 9:34 AM, Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil) <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math";
> panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2
> 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:Aptos;} /* Style Definitions
> */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {margin:0in; font-size:12.0pt;
> font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
> {mso-style-priority:99; color:blue; text-decoration:underline;}
> span.EmailStyle19 {mso-style-type:personal-reply;
> font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif; color:windowtext;} .MsoChpDefault
> {mso-style-type:export-only; font-size:10.0pt; mso-ligatures:none;} @page
> WordSection1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
> div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;} --> Hello,
> >>   I have reviewed and I approve the publication.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Clarence
> >>     From: Dan Voyer (davoyer) <[email protected]>
> >> Sent: Monday, February 23, 2026 15:44
> >> To: Acee Lindem <[email protected]>; Hegde, Shraddha <
> [email protected]>
> >> Cc: [email protected]; Peter Psenak (ppsenak) <[email protected]>;
> Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil) <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> lsr-chairs <[email protected]>; Yingzhen Qu <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; [email protected]; RFC Editor <
> [email protected]>; Alice Russo <[email protected]>
> >> Subject: Re: Gyan and Shraddha - Fwd: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9929
> <draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-11> for your review
> >>    Hi Acee,
> >>    I have review and I approve the publication.
> >>    Best,
> >> Dan
> >>    From: Acee Lindem <[email protected]>
> >> Date: Friday, February 20, 2026 at 9:52 AM
> >> To: Hegde, Shraddha <[email protected]>
> >> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>, Peter Psenak
> (ppsenak) <[email protected]>, Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil) <
> [email protected]>, Dan Voyer (davoyer) <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] <[email protected]>, lsr-chairs <[email protected]>,
> Yingzhen Qu <[email protected]>, [email protected] <
> [email protected]>, [email protected] <
> [email protected]>, RFC Editor <[email protected]>,
> Alice Russo <[email protected]>
> >> Subject: Re: Gyan and Shraddha - Fwd: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9929
> <draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-11> for your review
> >> Thanks Shraddha...
> >>
> >>
> >> Co-authors - note that I meant, please review and approve.
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Acee
> >>
> >>> On Feb 20, 2026, at 9:36 AM, Hegde, Shraddha <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Yes confirmed
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Acee Lindem <[email protected]>
> >>> Sent: 20 February 2026 18:15
> >>> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> >>> Cc: Hegde, Shraddha <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; lsr-chairs <[email protected]>;
> Yingzhen Qu <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> [email protected]; RFC Editor <[email protected]>;
> Alice Russo <[email protected]>
> >>> Subject: Re: Gyan and Shraddha - Fwd: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9929
> <draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-11> for your review
> >>> Importance: High
> >>>
> >>> Gyan and Shraddha,
> >>>
> >>> Please confirm your new Email addresses.
> >>>
> >>> All Co-authors,
> >>>
> >>> Please review and confirm.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Acee
> >>>
> >>>> On Feb 19, 2026, at 12:22 PM, Alice Russo <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Greetings, Gyan and Shraddha,
> >>>>
> >>>> Please see the message below regarding your document currently in
> AUTH48 state (
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9929.html__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue7o4WkxjGygOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-2LM81rA4$
> and other formats listed below).
> >>>>
> >>>> NOTE:  Because of the bounce messages from your email addresses
> within the original document, we have updated your email addresses in the
> RFC-to-be to match the ones in the To field above. Please review your
> contact information within the document and let us know any further updates.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you.
> >>>>
> >>>> Alice Russo
> >>>> RFC Production Center
> >>>>
> >>>>> Begin forwarded message:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From: [email protected]
> >>>>> Subject: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9929
> >>>>> <draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-11> for your review
> >>>>> Date: February 16, 2026 at 4:28:08 PM PST
> >>>>> To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> >>>>> [email protected], [email protected]
> >>>>> Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
> ,
> >>>>> [email protected], [email protected],
> >>>>> [email protected]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *****IMPORTANT*****
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Updated 2026/02/16
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue7o4WkxjGygOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-2uak82vs$
> ).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue7o4WkxjGygOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-2kV3eNVk$
> ).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *  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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue7o4WkxjGygOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-2e_CgA54$
> >.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *  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
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *  [email protected] (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).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *  [email protected], which is a new archival mailing
> list
> >>>>>     to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion
> >>>>>     list:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    *  More info:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iet
> >>>>> f-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkP
> >>>>> DUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue7o4WkxjGygOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-2mcX7YfI$
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    *  The archive itself:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/
> >>>>> auth48archive/__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue
> >>>>> 7o4WkxjGygOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-2x1Arw8w$
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    *  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,
> >>>>>       [email protected] 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc992
> >>>>> 9.xml__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue7o4WkxjGy
> >>>>> gOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-2Y9OO7xg$
> >>>>>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc992
> >>>>> 9.html__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue7o4WkxjG
> >>>>> ygOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-2LM81rA4$
> >>>>>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc992
> >>>>> 9.pdf__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue7o4WkxjGy
> >>>>> gOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-21Zc9Pd0$
> >>>>>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc992
> >>>>> 9.txt__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue7o4WkxjGy
> >>>>> gOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-2R7ha60I$
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Diff file of the text:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc992
> >>>>> 9-diff.html__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue7o4
> >>>>> WkxjGygOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-22oeYZm4$
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc992
> >>>>> 9-rfcdiff.html__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue
> >>>>> 7o4WkxjGygOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-2no9HyKE$  (side by side)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Diff of the XML:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc992
> >>>>> 9-xmldiff1.html__;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTu
> >>>>> e7o4WkxjGygOR7FUsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-2_xABOQo$
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tracking progress
> >>>>> -----------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9929
> >>>>> __;!!NpxR!kUe9vZ5eEJZ-xcMBPIlkPDUu84G4rddQJUovgr0YdlTue7o4WkxjGygOR7F
> >>>>> UsiSLsOrAlLuRJS-2ohYmvIQ$
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please let us know if you have any questions.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for your cooperation,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> RFC Editor
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --------------------------------------
> >>>>> RFC9929 (draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-11)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Title            : IGP Unreachable Prefix Announcement
> >>>>> Author(s)        : P. Psenak, Ed., C. Filsfils, D. Voyer, S. Hegde,
> G. Mishra
> >>>>> WG Chair(s)      : Acee Lindem, Christian Hopps, Yingzhen Qu
> >>>>> Area Director(s) : Jim Guichard, Ketan Talaulikar, Gunter Van de
> >>>>> Velde
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Qin Wu <[email protected]>
> To: Sandy Ginoza <[email protected]>, Mahesh Jethanandani <
> [email protected]>
> Cc: "BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET" <[email protected]>, "
> [email protected]" <[email protected]>, RFC Editor <
> [email protected]>, Andy Bierman <[email protected]>, "
> [email protected]" <[email protected]>, "maqiufang (A)" <
> [email protected]>, "[email protected]" <
> [email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Bcc:
> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 08:23:08 +0000
> Subject: [auth48] Re: [AD] [IANA] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9907
> <draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-28> for your review
> Hi, Sandy and all:
> I approve publication of this document with the latest change proposed.
>
> -Qin
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Sandy Ginoza [mailto:[email protected]]
> 发送时间: 2026年2月21日 1:34
> 收件人: Mahesh Jethanandani <[email protected]>
> 抄送: BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; RFC Editor <[email protected]>; Andy Bierman
> <[email protected]>; Qin Wu <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> maqiufang (A) <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> [email protected]
> 主题: Re: [AD] [IANA] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9907
> <draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-28> for your review
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CAUTION : This email originated outside the company. Do not click on any
> links or open attachments unless you are expecting them from the sender.
>
> ATTENTION : Cet e-mail provient de l'extérieur de l'entreprise. Ne cliquez
> pas sur les liens ou n'ouvrez pas les pièces jointes à moins de connaitre
> l'expéditeur.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Hi All,
>
> We have removed the text added to Section 3.9, as well as the introductory
> text that was added to 4.30.3.1 and 4.30.3.2 per Med’s preference.
>
> Regarding this item:
>
> > That new text was added to address a comment both Mahesh and myself
> discussed with the RFC editor team and which was echoed in this question:
> >
> > 20) <!--[rfced] Would you like to add examples of "reference"
> > substatements? The RPC and OPS ADs discussed this topic during
> > IETF 123. The examples would show that the RFC title does not need
> > to be included. (The exception is in the "revision" statement,
> > where the title is typically included.) For example:
> >
> > reference (with section)
> >  "RFC 8665, Section 5
> >   RFC 8666, Section 6";
> >
> > reference (just RFC number)
> >  "RFC 8665
> >   RFC 8666";
> > -->
> >
> > If I remember well, this is also to simplify the required reference
> checks/overload for the RFC Editor team (?).
>
>
> To clarify, we suggested adding a couple of examples to introduce how
> authors can refer to specific section numbers.  In our recent experience,
> YANG authors use a mix of reference styles - some of them are a bit
> confusing, for example:
>
> reference
>     “…
>      RFC 8200: Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification - Traffic
> Class”;
>
> reference
>      “draft-ietf-httpbis-semantics-19: HTTP Semantics
>      - Request Method POST”;
>
>
> Note that RFC 8200 has a section entitled “Traffic Classes”, so it’s
> unclear whether the authors mean to refer to that section or “Traffic
> Class” elsewhere in the document.  draft-ietf-httpbis-semantics was
> published as RFC 9110, which does not use the phrase “Request Method
> POST.”  Entries like these require the RPC to check the RFC and section
> titles and work with the authors to tidy them, which can be especially
> challenging for longer modules. We will continue to examine the reference
> clauses and reach out separately about potentially creating some basic
> recommendations for these clauses.
>
>
> The updated files are available here:
>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907.xml&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321099159%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Rl0Ps6GsXZ3Bk94Y75WavAm6gv6wsBiZAPbkwCJ%2B6gk%3D&reserved=0
>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907.txt&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321150981%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=C0Fdmkz9kYFmLRGqT5CHWOj0e2uWb9iRz2g7DKi9AMc%3D&reserved=0
>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321173040%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=TKgpFpZDRA16nqS5VjrzJNJ8DzfiynG7kC5lyHetQUc%3D&reserved=0
>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321190202%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=QrYPztyCjTAgLtjcsuRkVpp03iQlqx4BDLwbmjeFVgc%3D&reserved=0
>
> Diffs highlighting the most recent updates only:
>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-lastdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321202890%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Shxuz4DhgBHx1vqaLp6k88cioHtXzZCaYeU4230ciwE%3D&reserved=0
>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-lastrfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321216954%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=7J1cyba2ig8o%2B79RRo7urkTzn0n5v79eZe1S%2FO3aNy0%3D&reserved=0
> (side by side)
>
> AUTH48 diffs:
>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-auth48diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321232354%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fNdEJGXzEilKR61A1JNHWzNYcLSmnyho0AlsfPehUxI%3D&reserved=0
>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-auth48rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321250582%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dK6KWT9zQOuT7H1H%2FmgdSwPaSDlS5QSf1Z1dIPt4hSc%3D&reserved=0
> (side by side)
>
> Comprehensive diffs:
>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321267077%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=6nGlnzwwrqZAO822YgbDgsVw4miiEs5GvKQH62e6Ay8%3D&reserved=0
>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321286768%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=QN55K0QwwITHPj3x0rtQ2vFwF22fRu6scEV6EYvSYiU%3D&reserved=0
> (side by side)
>
> Please let us know if any additional updates are needed or if you approve
> the RFC for publication.
>
> Thanks,
> Sandy Ginoza
> RFC Production Center
>
>
>
> > On Feb 18, 2026, at 7:26 AM, Mahesh Jethanandani <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Megan,
> >
> > Based on the latest exchange ...
> >
> >> On Feb 12, 2026, at 8:11 PM, Megan Ferguson <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Mahesh,
> >>
> >> Sounds good.  We have incorporated the change to “Optional”.  We
> believe that closes out Issues 2 and 4 from our previous mail.
> >>
> >> So we will wait to hear back:
> >>
> >> -from the authors regarding Issue 1 (the added text to Section 3.9)
> >
> > The added text in Section 3.9 should be dropped.
> >
> >> -that the wiki page has been updated (Issue 3)
> >
> > Not sure who has the action item for this. If you want me to take care
> of it, please let me know.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >>
> >> prior to moving this document forward.
> >>
> >> The files have been posted here (please refresh):
> >>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907.txt&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321304639%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=56eQRGsFASPFpBUR8lREBn4e4eh1XHb8GphVBLzc3z8%3D&reserved=0
> >>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321321451%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=22IY55FK%2B%2FPqDeb5YOiOGR2nbYQlshqEv%2BCyl7%2Bkwco%3D&reserved=0
> >>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321337441%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Zb2NKCvdFZ9MlLFLDXHBBqOP0h39C5Mdq%2BtqjiHkH4Q%3D&reserved=0
> >>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907.xml&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321350703%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=wdnrMhH6Q4Yt8hCGf7IyQsHnM%2FUju4Fd1INTCOPHZT4%3D&reserved=0
> >>
> >> The related diff files have been posted here (please refresh):
> >>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321612368%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=JMDjzAw9ZNJBqPUuoomnsvyCPXFE720AyX5uwyAvMoM%3D&reserved=0
> (comprehensive)
> >>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321652695%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=y4Stc%2FWgY4IR%2BAcnNIW8x8bbu4xU8CX3O%2F1zHmK2htU%3D&reserved=0
> (comprehensive side by side)
> >>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-auth48diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321667384%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ZYXAi1s1%2BkIWbCDQ%2BpmmV6UkpbUAqAnZTAOZ2G54Hpg%3D&reserved=0
> (AUTH48 changes to date)
> >>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-auth48rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321683603%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=sC9hhTQIwSpW31jZBS5ENMjCtFn7bn7lnTYN8aLVRyM%3D&reserved=0
> (AUTH48 changes side by side)
> >>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-lastdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321700821%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=rreXeo6uX51pC0IW4IYsRJRJbskYaCzGBeSbodB2RJE%3D&reserved=0
> (last version to this)
> >>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-lastrfcdiff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321717595%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=DY%2FRbtT%2FUc%2FqpC%2FVdu3CoQ1iLLKRz6jUSLtedoMLGEQ%3D&reserved=0
> (last version side by side)
> >>
> >> The AUTH48 status page is viewable here:
> >>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauth48%2Frfc9907&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321737685%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=tFk2ssJ96IyCRTmc1qAlQ24skX0rhrNnlqEoA59fjJ8%3D&reserved=0
> >>
> >> Thank you.
> >>
> >> Megan Ferguson
> >> RFC Production Center
> >>
> >>> On Feb 12, 2026, at 4:32 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Megan,
> >>>
> >>>> On Feb 12, 2026, at 2:54 PM, Megan Ferguson <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Mahesh,
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for the quick reply!
> >>>>
> >>>> Some follow-ups below marked with [rfced].
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you.
> >>>>
> >>>> Megan Ferguson
> >>>> RFC Production Center
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Issue #2: Redundant text in Section 4.30.3.1:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We have updated to remove the text from the first paragraph in this
> section as Mahesh suggested.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Out of curiosity, is this a BCP 14 OPTIONAL?  Or is this all caps
> just to call attention to it?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Current:
> >>>>>> This template ends with a section labeled "OPTIONAL”.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My take is that it is not. It just happens to be all caps, and it
> just happens to be one of the keywords from BCP 14. If we want to
> disambiguate, we could call it TEMPLATE.
> >>>>
> >>>> [rfced] Could we simply have this appear as “Optional” (as it is
> inside a template)?
> >>>>
> >>>> Note that this would include a change in multiple places (twice in
> both Sections 4.30.3.1 and 4.30.3.2).
> >>>>
> >>>> Current:
> >>>> This template ends with a section labeled "OPTIONAL”.
> >>>> …
> >>>> -- OPTIONAL:
> >>>>
> >>>> Perhaps:
> >>>> This template ends with a section labeled "Optional”.
> >>>> …
> >>>> --Optional:
> >>>
> >>> I am ok with that
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Further related clean up:
> >>>> a) This discussion made me realize that we had not updated the <CODE
> BEGINS> and <CODE ENDS> tags used in Sections 4.30.3.1 and 4.30.3.2 to
> instead use <BEGIN TEMPLATE TEXT> and <END TEMPLATE TEXT> (as we had done
> in the security considerations template section (see discussion with Med
> below)). This change has now been incorporated (please refresh links to
> view).
> >>>>
> >>>> Note also that we made the following related change to the change log:
> >>>>
> >>>> Original:
> >>>> * Added code markers for the security template.
> >>>>
> >>>> Current:
> >>>> * Added template markers for the security template.
> >>>
> >>> I do agree that it is not code, and using code markers would be odd.
> Thanks for updating them to use template markers.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> b) Note also that we have removed the following text from Section
> 4.30.3.2 (to match its removal in 4.30.3.1).
> >>>>
> >>>> Original:
> >>>>
> >>>> This template ends with a section labeled "OPTIONAL".  Any text in
> >>>> this section that needs to be customized should be included in the
> >>>> template.  Text that does not require customization should be omitted
> >>>> from the IANA Considerations section.
> >>>>
> >>>> Current:
> >>>> This template ends with a section labeled "OPTIONAL”.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for catching that.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> b) In contrast, regarding your note (about Section 3.7.1):
> >>>>>>> *  Added code markers for the security template.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Why are the code markers being used for the security
> >>>>>>> considerations
> >>>>>>> template? It seems odd because it is prose, not code.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [Med] This one was requested by the trust. Please see
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fmeeting%2F116%2Fmaterials%2Fslides-116-netmod-05-security-considerations-template-for-yang-module-documents-00&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321760402%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=VSJPSgQyjP5jbbd89aJDdFJKqZbX9O%2F1ewXRzL7O2xQ%3D&reserved=0
> or
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmailarchive.ietf.org%2Farch%2Fmsg%2Fnetmod%2FgBEuz3mgOuyghmeQk7T4so_ZxF8%2F&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321780308%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=uf2Z1SU5tyLZ2f4PTeae%2BNAWqStVQrrqTRc%2BtxOn1gY%3D&reserved=0
> .
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> c) Similarly, why are code markers used for the templates
> >>>>>>> in Sections 4.30.3.1 and 4.30.3.2?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [Med] For the same reasons as above.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Might it be possible to update to <BEGIN TEMPLATE TEXT> and <END
> TEMPLATE TEXT> instead?  Additionally, should the following paragraph from
> the TLP should be included?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftrustee.ietf.org%2Fdocuments%2Ftrust-legal-provisions%2Ftlp-5%2F&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321799971%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vGcpel%2FasbVTEIgcKPKlzL61VPh0lAqX8Tm%2FODB6gG8%3D&reserved=0
> (which is linked to from
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fmeeting%2F116%2Fmaterials%2Fslides-116-netmod-05-security-considerations-template-for-yang-module-documents-00&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321815500%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=5NKBn%2BSwSSzRQZz55M9BfbOIxgWL1ZVfr1HdyRlhdhE%3D&reserved=0
> ):
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Section 9. Template Text
> >>>>> a. Certain RFCs may contain text designated as “Template Text” by
> the inclusion of the following legend in the introduction to the RFC:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> “This RFC contains text intended for use as a template as designated
> below by the markers <BEGIN TEMPLATE TEXT> and <END TEMPLATE TEXT> or other
> clear designation. Such Template Text is subject to the provisions of
> Section 9(b) of the Trust Legal Provisions.”
> >>>>
> >>>>> [Med] Works for me. Thanks
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Issue #3: The wiki page update to make
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.ietf.org%2Fgroup%2Fops%2Fyang-security-guidelines&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321832012%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=5kHdP6hYWtkBoMmE%2F%2FBs3582pyFyxl7j80I%2BBMEbefc%3D&reserved=0?
> match the template in the document:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Note that we have added this as an “approver” on the AUTH48 status
> page at
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauth48%2Frfc9907&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321851284%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=XsPRKBtq7mAKDkovvkoJhPwvvE4YUwSMH3hkz8eIr1Q%3D&reserved=0
> to ensure we match up differences between the doc and that page prior to
> publication.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In addition to updating to point to this document’s RFC number
> (once it is published), we think the following still need to be updated on
> the wiki page prior to publication (also viewable in the diff at
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907-wiki-diff.html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321869282%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=M%2F7tPmSQy%2BmjKZi8s7%2FEb1gfeWUjE5YyH7l%2FtzpG%2BhU%3D&reserved=0
> ):
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Current (at wiki):
> >>>>>> The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341]
> provides the means to restrict access for particular NETCONF or...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Perhaps (to match document):
> >>>>>> The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341]
> provides the means to restrict access for particular Network Configuration
> Protocol (NETCONF) or...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Current (at wiki):
> >>>>>> All writable data nodes are likely to be sensitive...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Perhaps (to match document):
> >>>>>> All writable data nodes are likely to be reasonably sensitive…
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Current (at wiki):
> >>>>>> ...e.g., ones that might be protected by a
> "nacm:default-deny-write”...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Perhaps (to match document):
> >>>>>> ...e.g., ones that might be protected by a
> "nacm:default-deny-write”…
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hmm. I am not sure if I am seeing a difference.
> >>>>
> >>>> [rfced] Sorry - copy and paste error:
> >>>>
> >>>> Perhaps:
> >>>> ...e.g., ones that are protected by a "nacm:default-deny-write”…
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Current (at wiki):
> >>>>>> ...or get-config) are particularly sensitive or vulnerable…
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Perhaps (to match document):
> >>>>>> ...or get-config) that are particularly sensitive or vulnerable…
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Current (at wiki):
> >>>>>> ...readable data nodes are ones that might be protected by a…
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Perhaps (to match document):
> >>>>>> ...readable data nodes are ones that are protected by a…
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Current (at wiki):
> >>>>>> ...then add this text to remind the specific sensitivity…
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Perhaps (to match document):
> >>>>>> ...then add this text as a reminder of the specific sensitivity…
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Issue #4: Our request for AD approval of Med’s suggestion.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> *Mahesh - please review and approve the following change:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> OLD:
> >>>>>> The IANA Considerations Section MAY also provide the following
> >>>>>> information if a default action is expected:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> NEW:
> >>>>>> The IANA Considerations Section MAY also provide the following
> >>>>>> information if a default action is to be overridden:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am ok with this change.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for checking.
> >>>>
> >>>> [rfced] No problem.  We have recorded your approval of this change in
> the Notes field of the AUTH48 status page, but have left your “Approval”
> field blank until the issue with the text in Section 3.9 issue is resolved
> (we believe we’ve heard back from you approving all other changes we
> requested - thank you!).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please review our updates carefully as we do not make changes once
> the document is published as an RFC.
> >>>>>> Please contact us with any further changes you may have.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh):
> >>>>>>
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907.txt&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321887485%7CUnk
> <https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9907.txt&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C1edcd33a95a844f0963b08de70a65561%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639072057321887485%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=WHPiMwm%2BsC5FJShCf4UF3L2Kt3U7PXt3Yay7bNiwULk%3D&reserved=0>
-- 
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to