Authors, We have now received all necessary approvals and consider AUTH48 complete: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9716
Thank you for your attention and guidance during the AUTH48 process. We will move this document forward in the publication process at this time. Best regards, RFC Editor/ap > On Feb 3, 2025, at 4:48 PM, Alanna Paloma <apal...@staff.rfc-editor.org> > wrote: > > Hi Amanda, > > The changes look good. Thank you! > > RFC Editor/ap > >> On Feb 3, 2025, at 4:38 PM, Amanda Baber via RT <iana-mat...@iana.org> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> These changes are complete: >> >> https://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters >> >> thanks, >> >> Amanda Baber >> IANA Operations Manager >> >> On Mon Feb 03 18:17:54 2025, apal...@staff.rfc-editor.org wrote: >>> IANA, >>> >>> Please update your registries as follows to match the edited document >>> at https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9716-diff.html. >>> >>> 1) Please update the Sub-TLV Names in the “Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, >>> 16, and 21” registry <https://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping- >>> parameters/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xhtml#sub-tlv-1-16-21> as follows. >>> >>> Old: >>> Sub-Type Sub-TLV Name >>> 46 SID only in the form of MPLS label >>> 47 IPv4 Node Address with optional SID for SR- >>> MPLS >>> 48 IPv6 Node Address with optional SID for SR- >>> MPLS >>> >>> New: >>> Sub-Type Sub-TLV Name >>> 46 SID only, in the form of MPLS label >>> 47 IPv4 Node Address with an optional SID for SR- >>> MPLS >>> 48 IPv6 Node Address with an optional SID for SR- >>> MPLS >>> >>> >>> 2) Please update the "Segment ID Sub-TLV Flags” registry >>> <https://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters/mpls-lsp- >>> ping-parameters.xhtml#segment-id-sub-tlv-flags> to include a hyphen in >>> “A Flag”. >>> >>> Old: >>> Bit Number Name >>> 1 A Flag >>> >>> New: >>> Bit Number Name >>> 1 A-Flag >>> >>> >>> 3) Please update the Meanings in the "Reply Path Return Codes” >>> registry <https://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping- >>> parameters/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xhtml#reply-path-return-codes> as >>> follows. >>> >>> Old: >>> Value Meaning >>> 0x0006 Use Reply Path TLV from this echo reply for building >>> next echo request. >>> 0x0007 Local policy does not allow dynamic return Path >>> building. >>> >>> New: >>> Value Meaning >>> 0x0006 Use Reply Path TLV from this echo reply for building >>> the next echo request >>> 0x0007 Local policy does not allow dynamic return path >>> building >>> >>> Best regards, >>> RFC Editor/ap >>> >>>> On Feb 3, 2025, at 10:10 AM, Alanna Paloma <apal...@staff.rfc- >>>> editor.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Authors, >>>> >>>> Kapil’s and Nagendra’s approvals have been noted: >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9716 >>>> >>>> We will now ask IANA to update their registry accordingly. After the >>>> IANA updates are complete, we will move forward with the publication >>>> process. >>>> >>>> Thank you, >>>> RFC Editor/ap >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Feb 1, 2025, at 5:51 AM, Nagendra Kumar >>>>> <nagendrakumar.nai...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I approve the document for publication. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Nagendra >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 8:49 AM kapil arora <kapil...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> I approve the document for publication. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Kapil Arora >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, 24 Jan 2025, 04:32 , <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org> wrote: >>>>> *****IMPORTANT***** >>>>> >>>>> Updated 2025/01/23 >>>>> >>>>> RFC Author(s): >>>>> -------------- >>>>> >>>>> Instructions for Completing AUTH48 >>>>> >>>>> Your document has now entered AUTH48. Once it has been reviewed and >>>>> approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC. >>>>> If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies >>>>> available as listed in the FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/). >>>>> >>>>> You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties >>>>> (e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing >>>>> your approval. >>>>> >>>>> Planning your review >>>>> --------------------- >>>>> >>>>> Please review the following aspects of your document: >>>>> >>>>> * RFC Editor questions >>>>> >>>>> Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor >>>>> that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as >>>>> follows: >>>>> >>>>> <!-- [rfced] ... --> >>>>> >>>>> These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email. >>>>> >>>>> * Changes submitted by coauthors >>>>> >>>>> Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your >>>>> coauthors. We assume that if you do not speak up that you >>>>> agree to changes submitted by your coauthors. >>>>> >>>>> * Content >>>>> >>>>> Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot >>>>> change once the RFC is published. Please pay particular attention >>>>> to: >>>>> - IANA considerations updates (if applicable) >>>>> - contact information >>>>> - references >>>>> >>>>> * Copyright notices and legends >>>>> >>>>> Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in >>>>> RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions >>>>> (TLP – https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). >>>>> >>>>> * Semantic markup >>>>> >>>>> Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements of >>>>> content are correctly tagged. For example, ensure that <sourcecode> >>>>> and <artwork> are set correctly. See details at >>>>> <https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>. >>>>> >>>>> * Formatted output >>>>> >>>>> Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the >>>>> formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is >>>>> reasonable. Please note that the TXT will have formatting >>>>> limitations compared to the PDF and HTML. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Submitting changes >>>>> ------------------ >>>>> >>>>> To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as >>>>> all >>>>> the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The >>>>> parties >>>>> include: >>>>> >>>>> * your coauthors >>>>> >>>>> * rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org (the RPC team) >>>>> >>>>> * other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g., >>>>> IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the >>>>> responsible ADs, and the document shepherd). >>>>> >>>>> * auth48archive@rfc-editor.org, which is a new archival mailing >>>>> list >>>>> to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion >>>>> list: >>>>> >>>>> * More info: >>>>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh- >>>>> 4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc >>>>> >>>>> * The archive itself: >>>>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/ >>>>> >>>>> * Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt out >>>>> of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive >>>>> matter). >>>>> If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that you >>>>> have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded, >>>>> auth48archive@rfc-editor.org will be re-added to the CC list and >>>>> its addition will be noted at the top of the message. >>>>> >>>>> You may submit your changes in one of two ways: >>>>> >>>>> An update to the provided XML file >>>>> — OR — >>>>> An explicit list of changes in this format >>>>> >>>>> Section # (or indicate Global) >>>>> >>>>> OLD: >>>>> old text >>>>> >>>>> NEW: >>>>> new text >>>>> >>>>> You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an >>>>> explicit >>>>> list of changes, as either form is sufficient. >>>>> >>>>> We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that >>>>> seem >>>>> beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of >>>>> text, >>>>> and technical changes. Information about stream managers can be >>>>> found in >>>>> the FAQ. Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream >>>>> manager. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Approving for publication >>>>> -------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email >>>>> stating >>>>> that you approve this RFC for publication. Please use ‘REPLY ALL’, >>>>> as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Files >>>>> ----- >>>>> >>>>> The files are available here: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9716.xml >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9716.html >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9716.pdf >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9716.txt >>>>> >>>>> Diff file of the text: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9716-diff.html >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9716-rfcdiff.html (side by >>>>> side) >>>>> >>>>> Diff of the XML: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9716-xmldiff1.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Tracking progress >>>>> ----------------- >>>>> >>>>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9716 >>>>> >>>>> Please let us know if you have any questions. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for your cooperation, >>>>> >>>>> RFC Editor >>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------- >>>>> RFC9716 (draft-ietf-mpls-spring-inter-domain-oam-20) >>>>> >>>>> Title : Path Monitoring System/Head-end based MPLS Ping >>>>> and Traceroute in Inter-domain Segment Routing Networks >>>>> Author(s) : S. Hegde, K. Arora, M. Srivastava, S. Ninan, N. >>>>> Kumar >>>>> WG Chair(s) : Nicolai Leymann, Tarek Saad, Tony Li >>>>> >>>>> Area Director(s) : Jim Guichard, John Scudder, Gunter Van de Velde >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> > -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
