Hi, These entries have been updated:
https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-ech-configuration-extensions thanks, Amanda On Thu Feb 26 20:54:23 2026, [email protected] wrote: > 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] > > editor.org> 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] > >> editor.org> 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] > >>>> editor.org> 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] > >>>>>> editor.org>: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> 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] > >>>>>>>>>>>> editor.org>: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 <rfc- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [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]
