Hi Eric, It should be less than a week. We were told it would be after the PR (https://github.com/ietf-tools/xml2rfc/pull/1292) was approved, and we see that it was.
Thank you, Madison Church RFC Production Center > On Feb 27, 2026, at 10:53 AM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: > > Can you give some more color on "relatively soon"? If it's more than a week > or so, it seems like perhaps we could just edit the text by hand.... > > -Ekr > > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 8:50 AM Madison Church <[email protected]> > wrote: > Authors, > > We have now received all necessary approvals for this document and consider > AUTH48 complete [1]. > > To our understanding, we anticipate that the fix for issue #1308 [2] will be > included in a new release of xml2rfc relatively soon. We will be sure to keep > everyone up to date, and we will move the document forward in the publication > process once the issue is resolved and the fix has been implemented into the > document. Until then, we will place this document in Tooling Issue (TI) state > [3]. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out. > > Thank you for your patience and collaboration during the AUTH48 process. > > Best, > Madison Church > RFC Production Center > > [1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9849 > [2] https://github.com/ietf-tools/xml2rfc/issues/1308 > [3] https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/queue/ > >> On Feb 27, 2026, at 10:28 AM, Madison Church <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> 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]
