IANA, Please update each entry in the Notes column as follows for the "TLS ECHConfig Extension" registry (https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-ech-configuration-extensions/tls-ech-configuration-extensions.xhtml#tls-echconfig-extension).
Current: Grease entries. Updated: GREASE entries Thank you, Madison Church RFC Production Center > On Feb 26, 2026, at 2:48 PM, Madison Church <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Eric, > > Thank you for your reply! We have marked your approval on the AUTH48 status > page (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849). > > We will now ask IANA to make their updates. > > Thank you! > Madison Church > RFC Production Center > >> On Feb 26, 2026, at 12:48 PM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I approve contingent on the break in issue #1308 being fixed. >> >> -Ekr >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 11:37 AM Madison Church >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Chris, Kazuho, Nick, >> >> Thank you for your replies. We have marked your final approvals on the >> AUTH48 status page (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849). Once we >> receive approval from Eric, we will ask IANA to complete their updates. >> >> Thank you! >> >> Madison Church >> RFC Production Center >> >>> On Feb 25, 2026, at 12:21 PM, Christopher Wood <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I approve publication. >>> >>> Best, >>> Chris >>> >>>> On Feb 24, 2026, at 5:11 PM, Madison Church <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Authors, >>>> >>>> Eric - Thank you for your reply. We have reverted all [RFC9846] citations >>>> back to [RFC8446] per your response. Aside from the issue filed on GitHub >>>> for this document (https://github.com/ietf-tools/xml2rfc/issues/1308), we >>>> believe there are no outstanding items that require further review. While >>>> this issue is being worked on, we can still note formatting approvals (and >>>> therefore final approvals) for this document. As requested, we will not >>>> proceed with publication until issue #1308 is resolved. >>>> >>>> All - Please review the XML file and its TXT, HTML, and PDF outputs, and >>>> let us know if any changes are required or if you approve the RFC for >>>> publication. While this is your approval of the XML and its outputs, we >>>> consider this your final assent that the document is ready for >>>> publication. To request changes or approve your RFC for publication, >>>> please reply to this email. Please use ‘REPLY ALL’, as all the parties >>>> CCed on this message need to see your approval. >>>> >>>> Please note that we will only make changes in the XML file from this point >>>> on. >>>> >>>> XML file: >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.xml >>>> >>>> Output files: >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.txt >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.pdf >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.html >>>> >>>> Lastdiff of the text (shows only the format changes): >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-lastdiff.html >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-lastrfcdiff.html (side by side) >>>> >>>> Comprehensive diff file of the text: >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-diff.html >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>>> >>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849 >>>> >>>> Once all approvals are received, we will proceed with IANA updates. >>>> >>>> Thank you! >>>> >>>> Madison Church >>>> RFC Production Center >>>> >>>>> On Feb 21, 2026, at 11:05 PM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 2:35 PM Madison Church >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Hello Authors, >>>>> >>>>> Now that we have all necessary content approvals, we have converted the >>>>> kramdown-rfc file to RFCXML. We made some additional formatting changes >>>>> in the XML file, including reference updates. >>>>> >>>>> We also have additional comments for your review: >>>>> >>>>> 1) Upon completing the XML conversion, we came across a bug in the >>>>> updated WHATWG-IPV4 reference, specifically in the TXT output. We have >>>>> filed an issue with the Tools Team; see >>>>> https://github.com/ietf-tools/xml2rfc/issues/1308 for further >>>>> clarification. >>>>> >>>>> This needs to be fixed before publication. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2) We have updated RFCs 8446 and 8447 to RFC-to-be-9846 and RFC 9847 per >>>>> Sean Turner’s mail from 2 December 2025. With these reference updates, >>>>> please review the updated files and let us know if any updates are needed >>>>> to the current in-text citations for these RFCs. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure this is advisable. The net impact is that it puts these >>>>> documents behind RFC 9846. I recognize that it's in Auth48, but we're >>>>> working through some issues, so it's probably not going to be like next >>>>> week. >>>>> >>>>> -Ekr >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Please review the XML file and its TXT, HTML, and PDF outputs, and let us >>>>> know if any changes are required or if you approve the RFC for >>>>> publication. While this is your approval of the XML and its outputs, we >>>>> consider this your final assent that the document is ready for >>>>> publication. To request changes or approve your RFC for publication, >>>>> please reply to this email. Please use ‘REPLY ALL’, as all the parties >>>>> CCed on this message need to see your approval. >>>>> >>>>> Please note that we will only make changes in the XML file from this >>>>> point on. >>>>> >>>>> XML file: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.xml >>>>> >>>>> Output files: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.txt >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.pdf >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.html >>>>> >>>>> Lastdiff of the text (shows only the format changes): >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-lastdiff.html >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-lastrfcdiff.html (side by side) >>>>> >>>>> Comprehensive diff file of the text: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-diff.html >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>>>> >>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849 >>>>> >>>>> Thank you! >>>>> >>>>> Madison Church >>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>> >>>>>>> On Feb 19, 2026, at 7:30 PM, Kazuho Oku <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you for all the changes. I approve. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2026年2月19日(木) 5:54 Madison Church <[email protected]>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Authors, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We have noted approvals for Paul, Eric, and Chris on the AUTH48 status >>>>>>> page (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849). Once we receive >>>>>>> Kazuho’s approval for the document’s content, we will move forward with >>>>>>> the RFCXML conversion and formatting updates. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Feb 18, 2026, at 2:39 PM, Paul Wouters <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ah thanks, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Approved >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 1:48 PM Sandy Ginoza >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Paul, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is also my mistake - apologies for the confusion! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please review the diffs in this file and let us know if you approve: >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849v4fixed-rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Sandy Ginoza >>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Feb 18, 2026, at 10:29 AM, Paul Wouters <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 6:38 PM Sandy Ginoza >>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi Eric, Paul*, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for your review and the updated .md file. The current >>>>>>>>> files are available here: >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.md >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.txt >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.pdf >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Diffs of the most recent updates: >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-lastdiff.html >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-lastrfcdiff.html (side by >>>>>>>>> side) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> AUTH48 diffs: >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48rfcdiff.html (side >>>>>>>>> by side) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Comprehensive diffs: >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-diff.html >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-rfcdiff.html (side by side) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * Paul, please review the diffs of the most recent updates and let us >>>>>>>>> know if you approve. >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-lastdiff.html >>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-lastrfcdiff.html (side by >>>>>>>>> side) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I am a bit confused here as the diff contains questions from you to >>>>>>>>> us, and I am not sure if I and/or authors are still >>>>>>>>> supposed to choose an option. That is, you seem to be asking more >>>>>>>>> than just approval from me? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Otherwise, the changes looks fine to me. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Authors, please let us know if any additional updates are needed or >>>>>>>>> if you approve the RFC for publication. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>>>> Sandy Ginoza >>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Feb 17, 2026, at 10:56 AM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Please find an updated markdown file at: >>>>>>>>>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/baf67ab50fb5238eab07d7e3f081aec4495c4742/rfc9849.md >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 8:14 AM Christopher Wood >>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> I approve publication of the latest document. Thanks for the work, >>>>>>>>>> all. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>>>> Chris >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2026, at 4:25 PM, Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kazuho, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your reply! We have updated our files to match your >>>>>>>>>>> name preference for consistency with other RFCs. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> For the change regarding HpkeKeyConfig, we will wait for additional >>>>>>>>>>> reviews/comments. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.txt >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.pdf >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.html >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Markdown file: >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.md >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-diff.html (comprehensive >>>>>>>>>>> diff) >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-rfcdiff.html (side by >>>>>>>>>>> side) >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48diff.html (diff >>>>>>>>>>> showing AUTH48 changes) >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48rfcdiff.html (side >>>>>>>>>>> by side) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Markdown diffs: >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 5, 2026, at 12:39 AM, Kazuho Oku <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hello Madison, authors, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you very much for pushing the draft forward. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have read through the updated markdown and I would like to >>>>>>>>>>>> request two nits. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I've separately filed a PR >>>>>>>>>>>> (https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/pull/672), but the >>>>>>>>>>>> nits >>>>>>>>>>>> are: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> # Section 5 and Section 6.1: Incorrect references to properties of >>>>>>>>>>>> HpkeKeyConfig >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> `cipher_suites`, `kem_id`, `public_key` are members of >>>>>>>>>>>> `HpkeKeyConfig`, and therefore it would be correct to refer to >>>>>>>>>>>> them as >>>>>>>>>>>> `ECHConfigContents.key_config.~`. However, `key_config` is missing. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> IMO this is editorial, however it is not a grammatical error, and >>>>>>>>>>>> therefore would appreciate reviews from other authors. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> # Update my name to use Kanji >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This would make the representation consistent with other RFCs that >>>>>>>>>>>> I coauthored. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> For the ease of the review, the diff file against the TXT version >>>>>>>>>>>> is attached. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2026年2月4日(水) 6:32 Madison Church <[email protected]>: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Eric, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the updated markdown file! Updated files are listed >>>>>>>>>>>>> below. We will wait to hear from you once you’ve completed your >>>>>>>>>>>>> top-to-bottom read. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> For details of the AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc (including the >>>>>>>>>>>>> two-part approval process), see >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.txt >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.pdf >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.html >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Markdown file: >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.md >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>> (comprehensive diff) >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-rfcdiff.html (side by >>>>>>>>>>>>> side) >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48diff.html (diff >>>>>>>>>>>>> showing AUTH48 changes) >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>> (side by side) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Markdown diffs: >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 3, 2026, at 2:17 PM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here is an updated markdown file with the outstanding PRs. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>> technical ones >>>>>>>>>>>>>> were reviewed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/18715d4e44626db8f3460442e363ede9526277b0/rfc9849.md >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I still need to do my top-to-bottom read. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Ekr >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 3, 2026 at 11:55 AM Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Authors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is another friendly weekly reminder that we await content >>>>>>>>>>>>>> approvals from Christopher, Kazuho, and Eric before moving along >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with formatting updates for this document. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 27, 2026, at 2:37 PM, Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Authors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is a friendly weekly reminder that we await content >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approvals from Christopher, Kazuho, and Eric before moving >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> along with formatting updates for this document. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 17, 2026, at 6:37 PM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 2:37 PM Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paul - We have noted your approvals for the two proposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> technical changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nick - Thank you for your reply! We have noted your approval >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the contents of this document on the AUTH48 status page >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and implemented your requested updates. The diff file was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> incredibly helpful! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We will wait for confirmation to implement the technical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will implement the technical changes in my copy. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Ekr >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review the contents of the document carefully. Contact >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us with any further updates or with your approval of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> document’s contents in its current form. Once we receive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approvals from Christopher, Kazuho, and Eric, we will move >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> forward with formatting updates. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For details of the AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc (including >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the two-part approval process), see >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.txt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.pdf >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Markdown file: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.md >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (comprehensive diff) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-rfcdiff.html (side >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by side) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (diff showing AUTH48 changes) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (side by side) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Markdown diffs: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 14, 2026, at 9:42 AM, Nick Sullivan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello RFC Production Center, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I reviewed the currently posted AUTH48 text for RFC-to-be 9849 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (rfc9849.txt on the RFC Editor authors page). Below are a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> small set of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remaining editorial issues. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Two items that are technically non-editorial are already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being handled >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the TLS WG GitHub repository (issues 656 and 665 / >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corresponding >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open PRs). To avoid duplication, I am not requesting those >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here or requesting any expansion of RFC number placeholders >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example RFCYYY1) in this note. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A) Typos and minor editorial fixes (no intended technical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Section 5.1 (Encoding the ClientHelloInner) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Replace “structured defined” with “structure defined”. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Section 6.1 (Offering ECH) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Capitalization: “Instead, It MUST …” -> “Instead, it MUST >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> …”. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Section 7 (Server Behavior introduction) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Consistency: “back-end server” -> “backend server”. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Section 10.8 (Cookies) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Insert missing space: “unencrypted.This” -> “unencrypted. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This”. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Section 11.3 (ECH Configuration Extension Registry) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Fix grammar in the “Recommended” field description and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remove >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> duplicated wording (“value with a value of”). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Proposed patch (unified diff against the currently posted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rfc9849.txt; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> excludes items already covered by issues 656 and 665; no RFC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> placeholder expansions) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --- rfc9849.txt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +++ rfc9849.txt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -521,7 +521,7 @@ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - structured defined in Section 5.3 of [RFC9147]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This does not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + structure defined in Section 5.3 of [RFC9147]. This >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - ClientHelloInner.random. Instead, It MUST >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generate a fresh >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + ClientHelloInner.random. Instead, it MUST >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generate a fresh >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -1129,7 +1129,7 @@ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - the client-facing server or as the back-end server. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Depending on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + the client-facing server or as the backend server. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Depending on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -1706,7 +1706,7 @@ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - unencrypted.This means differences in cookies >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between backend >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + unencrypted. This means differences in cookies >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between backend >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -2114,13 +2114,12 @@ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Recommended: A "Y" or "N" value indicating if the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extension is TLS >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - WG recommends that the extension be supported. This >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> column is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - assigned a value of "N" unless explicitly requested. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adding a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - value with a value of "Y" requires Standards Action >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [RFC8126]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + Recommended: A "Y" or "N" value indicating if the TLS >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Working Group >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + recommends that the extension be supported. This >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> column is assigned a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + value of "N" unless explicitly requested. Adding a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> value of "Y" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + requires Standards Action [RFC8126]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GitHub PR: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/pull/671/files >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> With these changes, the publication is approved by me. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nick Sullivan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 12:28 PM Nick Sullivan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Madison, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apologies for the delay, I was intending to do this over the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new year but didn't get to it. I'll review by end of week. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 10:31 AM Paul Wouters >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approved (via email and at the PRs listed) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 4:49 PM Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Authors, *Paul, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Happy new year! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is a friendly reminder that we have yet to hear back >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from you regarding the readiness of this document’s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contents before moving forward with formatting updates. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Paul - As responsible AD for this document, please review >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the changes below and let us know if you approve: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/pull/668 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/pull/667 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status page, see: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 18, 2025, at 12:46 PM, Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Eric, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the followup! We have updated the AUTH48 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> status page (https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and we will wait to hear from you once you complete your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> final content review. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 18, 2025, at 12:33 PM, Eric Rescorla >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FWIW I think Paul actually just approved this one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change, not the overall RFC. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have merged this markdown file into the version on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GitHub. There are two pending >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes that are technically not just editorial, though >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think obvious and need Paul's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approval: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/pull/668 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/pull/667 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In parallel, I will also need to give it a final >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> top-to-bottom read, which I hope to do in the next >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week or so. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Ekr >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 9:42 AM Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Paul, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have marked your approval on the AUTH48 status page >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 18, 2025, at 11:27 AM, Paul Wouters >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 18, 2025, at 11:06, Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Authors, *Paul, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Paul - As responsible AD, please note that we await >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your approval of RFC YYY1 as an Informative Reference >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (changed from Normative to Informative). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approved >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Authors - This is a friendly reminder that we await >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approvals from each author prior to moving forward >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with formatting updates. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For details of the AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (including the two-part approval process), see >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.txt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.pdf >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Markdown file: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.md >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> refresh): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (comprehensive diff) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (side by side) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (diff showing AUTH48 changes) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (side by side) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Markdown diffs: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 11, 2025, at 10:07 AM, Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Eric, *Paul, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eric - Thank you for your reply! We weren’t sure if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this was intentional, so thank you for clarifying. We >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have moved RFC YYY1 to the Informative References >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> section. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Paul - As responsible AD, please let us know if you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approve RFC YYY1 as an Informative Reference. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review the contents of the document carefully. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Contact us with any further updates or with your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approval of the document’s contents in its current >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> form. We will await approvals from each author prior >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to moving forward with formatting updates. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For details of the AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (including the two-part approval process), see >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.txt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.pdf >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Markdown file: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.md >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> refresh): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (comprehensive diff) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (side by side) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (diff showing AUTH48 changes) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (side by side) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Markdown diffs: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 5, 2025, at 4:38 PM, Eric Rescorla >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Madison, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe that the citation to RFCYYY1 should be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> informative, not normative. I corrected that in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my version but I guess I forgot to flag it. Paul, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> co-authors, any objections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Ekr >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2025 at 2:16 PM Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Eric, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the updated markdown file! We have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> incorporated your edits into the document. Upon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> further review, we have also updated the term >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Shared Mode" to follow the same pattern as "Split >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mode" (uppercase on first use and in titles, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lowercase otherwise). Please let us know any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> objections. Additionally, we will update the WHATWG >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reference per our discussion during formatting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aside from the updates mentioned, we have no further >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> questions/comments at this time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review the contents of the document >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> carefully. Contact us with any further updates or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with your approval of the document’s contents in its >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> current form. We will await approvals from each >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> author prior to moving forward with formatting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> updates. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For details of the AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (including the two-part approval process), see >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.txt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.pdf >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Markdown file: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.md >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (please refresh): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (comprehensive diff) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (side by side) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (diff showing AUTH48 changes) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (side by side) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Markdown diffs: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 4, 2025, at 7:12 PM, Eric Rescorla >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here is an updated markdown file with the fixed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> width adjustments. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/refs/heads/auth48/rfc9849.md >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Ekr >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2025 at 9:49 AM Eric Rescorla >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2025 at 6:23 AM Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Eric, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your reply! Please see inline. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 2, 2025, at 1:38 PM, Eric Rescorla >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Re the questions and comments: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * I will send a revised file with the fixed width >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues fixed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Noted! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * As I understand the WHATWG question, there are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> two distinct issues (1) whether to reference a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> commit and (2) whether to reference fragments. I'm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OK with referencing a commit like this if that's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what you agreed with WHATWG, but I read this text >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as saying not to reference fragments unless we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ensure that the anchor is permanent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://whatwg.org/working-mode#anchors. Have we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> done so for this one? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for clarifying. We are unsure if the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> current anchor [1] is permanent, so we would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recommend not using it and using the more general >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one [2]. However, if any other authors put in a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> request with WHATWG to make that anchor permanent, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> please let us know. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-ipv4-parser >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://url.spec.whatwg.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we are in agreement, then, thanks. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Ekr >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Ekr >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2025 at 6:58 AM Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Authors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is a friendly weekly reminder that we await >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> answers to the followup questions/comments below >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and your review of the document before continuing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the publication process. For details of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc (including the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> two-part approval process), see: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 25, 2025, at 8:34 AM, Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Eric, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your reply! We have updated the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> document as requested and have two followup items >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for your review, which can be viewed in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AUTH48 thread below or in the updated markdown >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file marked with "rfced". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 20, 2025, at 10:33 PM, Eric Rescorla >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Update: I fixed my affiliation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 8:23 PM Eric Rescorla >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you. I am editing this in GitHub. I merged >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in your proposed changes except >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for those I think are inadvisable, which I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reverted. I answered your questions inline. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can find the latest markdown file here (also >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attached): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/refs/heads/auth48/rfc9849.md >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Ekr >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 10:53 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Authors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While reviewing this document during AUTH48, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> please resolve (as necessary) the following >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> questions, which are also in the source file. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) <!-- [rfced] References >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a) Regarding [WHATWG-IPV4], this reference's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> date is May 2021. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The URL provided resolves to a page with "Last >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Updated 12 May 2025". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that WHATWG provides "commit snapshots" of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their living standards and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there are several commit snapshots from May >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2021 with the latest being from 20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> May 2021. For example: 20 May 2021 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (https://url.spec.whatwg.org/commit-snapshots/1b8b8c55eb4bed9f139c9a439fb1c1bf5566b619/#concept-ipv4-parser) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We recommend updating this reference to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most current version of the WHATWG >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Living Standard, replacing the URL with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more general URL to the standard >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (https://url.spec.whatwg.org/), and adding a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "commit snapshot" URL to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reference. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Current: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [WHATWG-IPV4] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHATWG, "URL - IPv4 Parser", WHATWG Living >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Standard, May >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2021, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-ipv4-parser>. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EKR: Per MT, WHATWG has asked us not to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that. We should leave >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this as-is and change the date to December 2025. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) For context, we reached out to WHATWG in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> September about a format for references to their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> standards (see: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/whatwg/meta/issues/363). The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposed update below for this reference >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reflects the approved format. It would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> helpful for the RPC to know what WHATWG has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> asked authors to not do so that we can reach out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for clarification and update our recommended >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> citation if necessary. With this in mind, let us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know if any updates need to be made. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [WHATWG-IPV4] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHATWG, "URL - IPv4 Parser", WHATWG Living >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Standard, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-ipv4-parser>. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Commit snapshot: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://url.spec.whatwg.org/commit-snapshots/1b8b8c55eb4bed9f139c9a439fb1c1bf5566b619/#concept-ipv4-parser >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding the date, we don't recommend using a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> future date for a reference as it doesn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reflect the date for a currently published work >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (unless there is an anticipated update to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHATWG specification in December 2025). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> d) FYI, RFCYYY1 (draft-ietf-tls-svcb-ech) will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be updated during the XML stage. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7) <!-- [rfced] We note that the following >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> terms use fixed-width font >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inconsistently. Please review these terms and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> let us know how we should update >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or if there are any specific patterns that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be followed (e.g., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed-width font used for field names, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variants, etc.). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accept_confirmation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cipher_suite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ClientHello >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ClientHelloInner >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ClientHelloOuter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ClientHelloOuterAAD >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> config_id >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ECHClientHello >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ECHConfig >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ECHConfig.contents.public_name >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ECHConfigContents >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ECHConfigList >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EncodedClientHelloInner >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inner >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maximum_name_length >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> payload >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public_key >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ServerHello.random >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zeros >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> —> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EKR: Thanks. Fixed width should be used for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> field names and other PDUs. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I notice that some of these are regular words >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (zeros) so you have to determine from context >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whether it's referring to some protocol element >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or just to the concept "carries an encrypted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> payload" versus "the payload field". Do you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want to take a cut at changing as many of these >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as make sense and then I can review, or would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you prefer I make the changes? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One question is what to do in definition lists. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My sense is that the list heds should be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-fixed-width but maybe you have a convention. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Thank you for offering to make changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please feel free to attach an updated markdown >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file containing the changes for terms using >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed-width font. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For definition lists, we typically leave this up >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the authors to determine how they would like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the terms to appear for consistency. For an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example of terms in a definition list using a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed-width font, see: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9623.html#section-5.1.1. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.txt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.pdf >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.xml >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849.md >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (please refresh): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (side by side) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (side by side) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Markdown diffs: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48diff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9849-md-auth48rfcdiff.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We will await approvals from each author prior >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to moving forward with formatting updates. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> details of the AUTH48 process in kramdown-rfc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (including the two-part approval process), see: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Madison Church >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFC Production Center >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Kazuho Oku >>>>>>>>>>>> <rfc9849.txt.kazuho.diff> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Kazuho Oku >> > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
