Hi Karen,
All these changes look good.
Please make the “source list” —> “source-list” and “filter mode” —>
“filter-mode” changes per my response on 9776.
Thanks!
Brian
> On Mar 17, 2025, at 5:53 PM, Karen Moore <kmo...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> Thank you for your reply and clarifications. Our files have been updated to
> reflect the following changes:
>
> - made “filter timer” (when singular) uppercase
> - made “query message(s)” uppercase
> - added “Report” to the title of Appendix A.1 (e.g., "State-Change Report
> Messages”)
> - hyphenated “Source List Change Report” (e.g., “Source-List-Change Report”)
>
> Please review the changes and let us know if any further updates are needed
> or if you approve the document in it’s current form.
>
> FYI: Questions that were asked in the thread for RFC-to-be 9776 that pertain
> to this document:
>
> 1) Please confirm if all lowercase instances of “filter mode” should be
> “filter-mode” in RFC-to-be 9777 for consistency.
>
> 2) Should all instances of “source list” be “source-list” (the parameter) in
> RFCs-to-be 9776 and 9777?
>
>
> —Files (please refresh)—
> The updated XML file is here:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9777.xml
>
> The updated output files are here:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9777.txt
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9777.pdf
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9777.html
>
> These diff files show all changes made during AUTH48:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9777-auth48diff.html
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9777-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by side)
>
> These diff files show only the changes made during the last edit round:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9777-lastdiff.html
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9777-lastrfcdiff.html (side by side)
>
> These diff files show all changes made to date:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9777-diff.html
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9777-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
>
> Best regards,
> RFC Editor/kc
>
>
>> On Mar 17, 2025, at 7:26 AM, Brian Haberman <br...@innovationslab.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Karen,
>>
>>> On Mar 14, 2025, at 6:34 PM, Karen Moore <kmo...@staff.rfc-editor.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Brian,
>>>
>>> Thank you for providing the XML files with updates to the terminology (per
>>> the cluster-wide questions) and answers to our questions. We have added
>>> further updates based on your replies; the updated files are below. Please
>>> see some additional questions/clarifications.
>>>
>>> 1) Please let us know if you would like to add any keywords (beyond those
>>> in the title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search.
>>>
>>
>> Nothing to add.
>>
>>> 2) We did not see a reply to this question:
>>>
>>> Because this document will likely be published at the same time as 3376bis,
>>> we have updated the reference to refer to RFC 9776. Please let us know if
>>> any corrections are needed.
>>>
>>> Please consider whether it is appropriate to refer to [BCP57] and [STD100],
>>> or if referring to the specific RFCs is preferred.
>>>
>>
>> Given the relationship between the documents, I would suggest keeping the
>> reference to 9776.
>>
>>> 3) In RFCs-to-be 9776 and 9777, “Source Timer” is uppercase when singular;
>>> otherwise, the plural form is lowercase. In RFC-to-be 9777, “filter timer”
>>> is lowercase in the running text and uppercase in tables. Are any further
>>> updates needed for consistency (i.e., make the singular form of “filter
>>> timer” uppercase in the running text)?
>>
>> The singular form should be capitalized as it refers to a specific instance.
>> When being referred to in a collection (e.g., source timers), we kept it
>> lowercase. Please make it consistent.
>>
>>>
>>> 4) We hyphenated some instances of “State Change Report” for consistency
>>> (e.g., “State-Change Report”). This term is also hyphenated in RFC-to-be
>>> 9776.
>>>
>>
>> Correct.
>>
>>> We also hyphenated “State Change Record” and “State Change Messages”; if
>>> that is not preferred, please let us know. Should “State-Change Messages”
>>> (title of A.1) perhaps be “State-Change Report Messages”?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, the title of the appendix should be updated as noted.
>>
>>> 5) In the running text, we updated "MLDv2 Multicast Listener Report” to
>>> "Version 2 Multicast Listener Report” (2 instances) to match the “ICMPv6
>>> “type” Numbers" registry
>>> <https://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters>.
>>>
>>> In the running text, we made the following updates (1 instance each) for
>>> consistency and to match the registry. If it is not preferred to include
>>> the values here, please let us know.
>>>
>>> Version 1 Multicast Listener Done -> MLDv1 Multicast Listener Done (Type =
>>> decimal 132)
>>> Version 1 Multicast Listener Report -> MLDv1 Multicast Listener Report
>>> (Type = decimal 131)
>>> MLDv1 Multicast Listener Report -> MLDv1 Multicast Listener Report (Type =
>>> decimal 131)
>>>
>>
>> All good changes!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Brian
>>
>
--
auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org
To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
