Hi Jorge, Thank you for your reply!
Sincerely, Sarah Tarrant RFC Production Center > On Mar 10, 2026, at 2:13 PM, Jorge Rabadan (Nokia) <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > Thanks very much! > > Please see some responses along your email with [jorge]. > > Thanks. > Jorge > > From: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> > Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2026 at 9:56 AM > To: Jorge Rabadan (Nokia) <[email protected]>, [email protected] > <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, > [email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, > [email protected] <[email protected]>, Adam 1. Simpson (Nokia) > <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>, Gunter van de Velde > (Nokia) <[email protected]>, [email protected] > <[email protected]>, [email protected] > <[email protected]> > Subject: Document intake questions about > <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking-18> > > > CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking > links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional > information. > > > > Author(s), > > Congratulations, your document has been successfully added to the RFC Editor > queue! > The team at the RFC Production Center (RPC) is looking forward to working > with you > as your document moves forward toward publication. To help reduce processing > time > and improve editing accuracy, please respond to the questions below. Please > confer > with your coauthors (or authors of other documents if your document is in a > cluster) as necessary prior to taking action in order to streamline > communication. > If your document has multiple authors, only one author needs to reply to this > message. > > As you read through the rest of this email: > > * If you need/want to make updates to your document, we encourage you to make > those > changes and resubmit to the Datatracker. This allows for the easy creation of > diffs, > which facilitates review by interested parties (e.g., authors, ADs, doc > shepherds). > * If you feel no updates to the document are necessary, please reply with any > applicable rationale/comments. > > [jorge] noted. No updates really. > > > Please note that the RPC team will not work on your document until we hear > from you > (that is, your document will remain in AUTH state until we receive a reply). > Even > if you don't have guidance or don't feel that you need to make any updates to > the > document, you need to let us know. After we hear from you, your document will > start > moving through the queue. You will be able to review and approve our updates > during AUTH48. > > Please feel free to contact us with any questions you may have at > [email protected]. > > Thank you! > The RPC Team > > -- > > 1) As there may have been multiple updates made to the document during Last > Call, > please review the current version of the document: > > * Is the text in the Abstract still accurate? > * Are the Authors' Addresses, Contributors, and Acknowledgments > sections current? > > [jorge] yes, abstract still accurate and those sections current. > > > 2) Please share any style information that could help us with editing your > document. For example: > > * Is your document's format or its terminology based on another document, > WG style guide, etc.? If so, please provide a pointer to that information > (e.g., "This document's terminology should match DNS terminology in > RFC 9499." or "This document uses the style info at > <https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhttpwg.org%2Fadmin%2Feditors%2Fstyle-guide&data=05%7C02%7Cjorge.rabadan%40nokia.com%7Cda74e062aba64aa6c94e08de7ec5f796%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C639087585914754589%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=DSg1fA82c%2B7HpU5UpGH%2FfkzH6nhRQQks89DE8eKZ9%2FA%3D&reserved=0>.”). > > [jorge] in general, terminology should follow the one used in RC7432, 8365, > 9136. > > * Is there a general pattern of capitalization or formatting of terms that > editors can follow (e.g., "Field names should have initial capitalization." > or "Parameter names should be in double quotes." or "<tt/> should be used > for token names." etc.)? > > [jorge] capitalization should be kept as is. In case of inconsistency, we can > discuss. > > > 3) Please carefully review the entries and their URLs in the > References section with the following in mind. Note that we will > update as follows unless we hear otherwise at this time: > > * References to obsoleted RFCs will be updated to point to the current > RFC on the topic in accordance with Section 4.8.6 of RFC 7322 > (RFC Style Guide). > > * References to I-Ds that have been replaced by another I-D will be > updated to point to the replacement I-D. > > * References to documents from other organizations that have been > superseded will be updated to their superseding version. > > Note: To check for outdated RFC and I-D references, you can use > idnits <https://author-tools.ietf.org/idnits>. You can also help the > IETF Tools Team by testing idnits3 <https://author-tools.ietf.org/idnits3/> > with your document and reporting any issues to them. > > [jorge] the references section should be correct. > > > 4) Is there any text that requires special handling? For example: > * Are there any sections that were contentious when the document was drafted? > * Are any sections that need to be removed before publication marked as such > (e.g., Implementation Status sections (per RFC 7942)). > * Are there any instances of repeated text/sections that should be edited > the same way? > > [jorge] no contentious sections in the current text, no sections to be > removed. Terminology is used throughout the document, so editing should be > consistent. But nothing really especial. > > > 5) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while editing this > document? > > [jorge] not that I can think of. > > > On Mar 10, 2026, at 11:50 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > > > The document draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking-18 has > > changed from MISSREF*A*R(1G) state to EDIT*A state. We thought you'd like > > to know. > > You can also follow your document's state at > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php>. > > For definitions of state names, please see > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/queue/#state_def>. > > > > If you have questions, please send mail to [email protected]. > > > > Best regards, > > The RFC Editor Team > > > > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
