Hi Amanda, The changes look good. Thank you!
Madison Church RFC Production Center > On Feb 26, 2026, at 4:38 PM, Amanda Baber via RT <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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]
