Hi Panos,

Thank you for the heads up! 

Could you also answer the intake questions so I can move the draft from AUTH to 
EDIT state?

Sincerely,
Sarah Tarrant
RFC Production Center

> On Feb 26, 2026, at 12:22 PM, Kampanakis, Panos <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Sarah,
> 
> I just uploaded version -10 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sshm-mlkem-hybrid-kex-10 
> which fixes one small nit from -09. 
> 
> It is ready for the queue now!
> 
> Thank you,
> Panos
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2026 5:16 PM
> To: Kampanakis, Panos <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Hansen, 
> Torben <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Document intake questions about 
> <draft-ietf-sshm-mlkem-hybrid-kex-09>
> 
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
> links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the 
> content is safe.
> 
> 
> 
> Author(s),
> 
> Congratulations, your document has been successfully added to the RFC Editor 
> queue!
> The team at the RFC Production Center (RPC) is looking forward to working 
> with you as your document moves forward toward publication. To help reduce 
> processing time and improve editing accuracy, please respond to the questions 
> below. Please confer with your coauthors (or authors of other documents if 
> your document is in a
> cluster) as necessary prior to taking action in order to streamline 
> communication.
> If your document has multiple authors, only one author needs to reply to this 
> message.
> 
> As you read through the rest of this email:
> 
> * If you need/want to make updates to your document, we encourage you to make 
> those changes and resubmit to the Datatracker. This allows for the easy 
> creation of diffs, which facilitates review by interested parties (e.g., 
> authors, ADs, doc shepherds).
> * If you feel no updates to the document are necessary, please reply with any 
> applicable rationale/comments.
> 
> 
> Please note that the RPC team will not work on your document until we hear 
> from you (that is, your document will remain in AUTH state until we receive a 
> reply). Even if you don't have guidance or don't feel that you need to make 
> any updates to the document, you need to let us know. After we hear from you, 
> your document will start moving through the queue. You will be able to review 
> and approve our updates during AUTH48.
> 
> Please feel free to contact us with any questions you may have at 
> [email protected].
> 
> Thank you!
> The RPC Team
> 
> --
> 
> 1) As there may have been multiple updates made to the document during Last 
> Call, please review the current version of the document:
> 
> * Is the text in the Abstract still accurate?
> * Are the Authors' Addresses, Contributors, and Acknowledgments sections 
> current?
> 
> 
> 2) Please share any style information that could help us with editing your 
> document. For example:
> 
> * Is your document's format or its terminology based on another document?
> If so, please provide a pointer to that document (e.g., this document's 
> terminology should match DNS terminology in RFC 9499).
> * Is there a pattern of capitalization or formatting of terms? (e.g., field 
> names should have initial capitalization; parameter names should be in double 
> quotes; <tt/> should be used for token names; etc.)
> 
> 
> 3) Please carefully review the entries and their URLs in the References 
> section with the following in mind. Note that we will update as follows 
> unless we hear otherwise at this time:
> 
> * References to obsoleted RFCs will be updated to point to the current RFC on 
> the topic in accordance with Section 4.8.6 of RFC 7322 (RFC Style Guide).
> 
> * References to I-Ds that have been replaced by another I-D will be updated 
> to point to the replacement I-D.
> 
> * References to documents from other organizations that have been superseded 
> will be updated to their superseding version.
> 
> Note: To check for outdated RFC and I-D references, you can use idnits 
> <https://author-tools.ietf.org/idnits>. You can also help the IETF Tools Team 
> by testing idnits3 <https://author-tools.ietf.org/idnits3/>
> with your document and reporting any issues to them.
> 
> 
> 4) Is there any text that requires special handling? For example:
> * Are there any sections that were contentious when the document was drafted?
> * Are any sections that need to be removed before publication marked as such 
> (e.g., Implementation Status sections (per RFC 7942)).
> * Are there any instances of repeated text/sections that should be edited the 
> same way?
> 
> 
> 5) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while editing this 
> document?
> 
>> On Feb 24, 2026, at 4:13 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> 
>> Author(s),
>> 
>> Your document draft-ietf-sshm-mlkem-hybrid-kex-09, which has been 
>> approved for publication as an RFC, has been added to the RFC Editor 
>> queue <https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php>.
>> 
>> If your XML file was submitted using the I-D submission tool 
>> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/>, we have already retrieved it 
>> and have started working on it.
>> 
>> If you did not submit the file via the I-D submission tool, or if you 
>> have an updated version (e.g., updated contact information), please 
>> send us the file at this time by attaching it in your reply to this 
>> message and specifying any differences between the approved I-D and 
>> the file that you are providing.
>> 
>> You will receive a separate message from us asking for style input.
>> Please respond to that message.  When we have received your response, 
>> your document will then move through the queue. The first step that we 
>> take as your document moves through the queue is converting it to 
>> RFCXML (if it is not already in RFCXML) and applying the formatting 
>> steps listed at <https://www.rfc-editor.org/pubprocess/how-we-update/>.
>> Next, we will edit for clarity and apply the style guide 
>> (<https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/>).
>> 
>> You can check the status of your document at 
>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php>.
>> 
>> You will receive automatic notifications as your document changes 
>> queue state (for more information about these states, please see 
>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/queue/>). When we have completed our 
>> edits, we will move your document to AUTH48 state and ask you to 
>> perform a final review of the document.
>> 
>> Please let us know if you have any questions.
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> 
>> The RFC Editor Team
>> 
> 

-- 
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to