Hi Sarah.

> 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?

The -07 version addresses the changes that were needed to complete IESG 
Evaluation.

> 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://httpwg.org/admin/editors/style-guide>.").
> * 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.)?

It is related to RFC 5280, which defines GeneralName.  This document defines a 
new otherName form of GeneralName.

> 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 * References to I-Ds that have been replaced by another I-D will be 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 superseded will be updated to their superseding version.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 Note: To check for outdated RFC and I-D references, you can use 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.

All references are already final.

> 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?

The handling of name constraints was carefully crafted to align with the 
Section 4.2.1.10 of RFC 5280.

> 5) This document uses one or more of the following text styles. 
> Are these elements used consistently?
> 
> * fixed width font (<tt/> or `)
> * italics (<em/> or *)
> * bold (<strong/> or **)

These are not used.

> 6) This document contains sourcecode: 
> 
> * Does the sourcecode validate?
> * Some sourcecode types (e.g., YANG) require certain references and/or text 
> in the Security Considerations section. Is this information correct?
> * Is the sourcecode type indicated in the XML? (See information about 
> types: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=sourcecode-types.)

Yes, the ASN.1 compiles without errors.

There is pseudocode in Section 3.4 of the document.

> 7) Would you like to participate in the RPC Pilot Test for editing in 
> kramdown-rfc?
> If so, please let us know and provide a self-contained kramdown-rfc file. For 
> more
> information about this experiment, see:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc.

We used kramdown-rfc, and we will gladly participate in the experiment.

> 8) Would you like to participate in the RPC Pilot Test for completing AUTH48 
> in 
> GitHub? If so, please let us know and provide all author, AD, and/or document 
> shepherd GitHub usernames. For more information about this experiment, see:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=rpc-github-phase-0-pilot-test.

We are willing.

> 9) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while editing this 
> document?

No.

Russ

-- 
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to