Hi, Sean and Eric. On March 26, Eric let us know that an updated XML was available at <https://github.com/mlswg/mls-architecture/blob/main/rfc9750-draft.xml>. We fetched the March 26 XML, created the output files, and posted them on March 31 (10:32 AM PST). We had some follow-up questions, and Eric replied (also March 31) with "I have created a PR to address your comments and detailed how they were addressed." We also asked for and received AD approval re. some of the changes.
It looks like we now need the following: * The latest XML file from Eric (incorporating the March 31 updates), so that we can create and post the latest output files * Approvals from authors (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9750) if no further updates are needed Thank you! RFC Editor/lb > On Apr 9, 2025, at 8:46 AM, Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com> wrote: > > Lynne, > > Can you advise on the status? When should we expect "final" versions of the > document to be up for review/approval? > > -Ekr >> On Apr 3, 2025, at 1:11 PM, Sean Turner <s...@sn3rd.com> wrote: >> >> Are we waiting on a new version that incorporates ekr’s updates? >> >> spt > >>> On Wed, Apr 2, 2025 at 8:32 AM Lynne Bartholomew >>> <lbartholo...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: >>> Hi, Paul. So noted: >>> >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9750 >>> >>> Thank you! >>> >>> RFC Editor/lb >>> >>> > On Apr 2, 2025, at 5:23 AM, Paul Wouters <paul.wout...@aiven.io> wrote: >>> > >>> > Approved as AD - these were brought to attention of the WG. >>> > >>> > Paul >>> > >>> > On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 2:13 PM Lynne Bartholomew >>> > <lbartholo...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: >>> > Hi, Eric. Thanks for the quick updates! >>> > >>> > RFC Editor/lb >>> > >>> > > On Mar 31, 2025, at 10:53 AM, Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > I have created a PR to address your comments and detailed how they were >>> > > addressed. >>> > > >>> > > https://github.com/mlswg/mls-architecture/pull/332 >>> > > >>> > > > 1. Should 'rotation of "last resort" KeyPackage.' be 'rotation of the >>> > > > "last resort" KeyPackage.'? >>> > > >>> > > Yes, I have changed it. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > 2. Apologies for missing this earlier: Should "ciphersuite" be "cipher >>> > > > suite" in running text, per usage in RFC 9420, or OK to leave as >>> > > > is? >>> > > >>> > > Yes, I have changed it. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > 3. Regarding "A Delivery Service (DS), which can receive and >>> > > > distribute messages between group members. In the case of group >>> > > > messaging, the delivery service ...": Would you like "delivery >>> > > > service" to be "Delivery Service" (which we still see used >>> > > > several times elsewhere) or "DS"? (We also see "Authentication >>> > > > Service" spelled out in Sections 8.4.3 and 8.4.3.1.) >>> > > >>> > > I have changed "delivery service" to "DS". I changed to AS in >>> > > 8.4.3.1 but I think it makes the most sense as-is in the first >>> > > use in 8.4.3. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > 4. Should "prevents selective attack on" be "prevents selective >>> > > > attacks on"? >>> > > >>> > > It is correct as is. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > 5. Should "Handshake or application message" be "handshake or >>> > > > application message", per "handshake" as used elsewhere? >>> > > >>> > > Fixed. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > 6. As we are now following CMOS guidance to initial-capitalize >>> > > > prepositions of five or more letters in titles, would you consider >>> > > > changing "against" to "Against" in "No Protection against Replay by >>> > > > Insiders"? >>> > > >>> > > Changed. >>> > > >>> > > -Ekr >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 10:32 AM Lynne Bartholomew >>> > > <lbartholo...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: >>> > > Hi, Eric and *AD (Paul or Deb). >>> > > >>> > > Eric, thank you for making the additional updates and for the latest >>> > > XML file! We have follow-up items for you and for the AD, as flagged >>> > > below. >>> > > >>> > > * AD: It is difficult for us to determine whether or not some of the >>> > > new updates to this document might be considered "beyond editorial". >>> > > Please review the following, and let us know any concerns. >>> > > >>> > > 1. update to Section 2.1, Paragraph 3 (re. LeafNode) >>> > > 2. updated "... used only once, and init_key ..." sentence in Section >>> > > 5.1 >>> > > 3. new Recommendation near the end of Section 5.1 >>> > > 4. update to the "A policy for when two credentials" bullet in Section 7 >>> > > 5. removal of the last paragraph of Section 8.1.4 >>> > > 6. change from "to attack forward security" to "to attack >>> > > post-compromise security" in Section 8.4.2 >>> > > 7. new Section 8.6 ("No Protection against Replay by Insiders") >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Eric: A few follow-up items for you: >>> > > >>> > > 1. Should 'rotation of "last resort" KeyPackage.' be 'rotation of the >>> > > "last resort" KeyPackage.'? >>> > > >>> > > 2. Apologies for missing this earlier: Should "ciphersuite" be "cipher >>> > > suite" in running text, per usage in RFC 9420, >>> > > or OK to leave as is? >>> > > >>> > > 3. Regarding "A Delivery Service (DS), which can receive and distribute >>> > > messages >>> > > between group members. In the case of group messaging, the >>> > > delivery service ...": >>> > > Would you like "delivery service" to be "Delivery Service" (which we >>> > > still see used several times elsewhere) or "DS"? >>> > > (We also see "Authentication Service" spelled out in Sections 8.4.3 >>> > > and 8.4.3.1.) >>> > > >>> > > 4. Should "prevents selective attack on" be "prevents selective attacks >>> > > on"? >>> > > >>> > > 5. Should "Handshake or application message" be "handshake or >>> > > application message", per "handshake" as used elsewhere? >>> > > >>> > > 6. As we are now following CMOS guidance to initial-capitalize >>> > > prepositions of five or more letters in titles, >>> > > would you consider changing "against" to "Against" in "No Protection >>> > > against Replay by Insiders"? >>> > > >>> > > We have posted the latest files here. Please refresh your browser: >>> > > >>> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750.txt >>> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750.pdf >>> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750.html >>> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750.xml >>> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-diff.html >>> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-rfcdiff.html (side by >>> > > side) >>> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-auth48diff.html >>> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-auth48rfcdiff.html (side >>> > > by side) >>> > > >>> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-xmldiff1.html >>> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-xmldiff2.html >>> > > >>> > > Thanks again! >>> > > >>> > > RFC Editor/lb >>> > > >>> > > > On Mar 26, 2025, at 1:04 PM, Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com> wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > I have now completed my review and made final edits. All open issues >>> > > > for this version are closed. >>> > > > >>> > > > The updated XML can be found at: >>> > > > https://github.com/mlswg/mls-architecture/blob/main/rfc9750-draft.xml >>> > > > >>> > > > -Ekr >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 8:42 AM Lynne Bartholomew >>> > > > <lbartholo...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: >>> > > > Hi, Eric. >>> > > > >>> > > > Many thanks for addressing our questions and making the file updates! >>> > > > We'll look forward to hearing from you after you've done your final >>> > > > review. >>> > > > >>> > > > RFC Editor/lb >>> > > > >>> > > > > On Mar 24, 2025, at 2:10 PM, Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com> wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Update: >>> > > > > I have now gone through and addressed all the RPC comments and >>> > > > > updated the relevant XML and md accordingly. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > My next step will be to actually read the document top to bottom >>> > > > > for final review. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > -Ekr >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 8:59 AM Lynne Bartholomew >>> > > > > <lbartholo...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: >>> > > > > Hi, Eric. So noted. Thank you! >>> > > > > >>> > > > > RFC Editor/lb >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > On Mar 3, 2025, at 6:03 AM, Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com> wrote: >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > I have created issues corresponding to the inline RPC >>> > > > > > comments/questions and have tagged Lynn in them so she can see >>> > > > > > progress. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > -Ekr >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 9:51 AM Jean Mahoney >>> > > > > > <jmaho...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: >>> > > > > > Eric, >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > On 2/25/25 3:14 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: >>> > > > > > > Update: >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > I have backported the copy-edit changes I approve of and >>> > > > > > > reverted the >>> > > > > > > rest in the XML, which can be found here: >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > https://github.com/mlswg/mls-architecture/pull/273 >>> > > > > > > <https://github.com/ >>> > > > > > > mlswg/mls-architecture/pull/273> >>> > > > > > > https://github.com/ekr/mls-architecture/blob/merge_rpc_comments/rfc9750- >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > draft.xml <https://github.com/ekr/mls-architecture/blob/ >>> > > > > > > merge_rpc_comments/rfc9750-draft.xml> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > I will next go through the RPC's substantive questions and file >>> > > > > > > GitHub >>> > > > > > > issues for each of them so we can work through them. Is there >>> > > > > > > someone >>> > > > > > > you would like tagged on these issues? >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Lynne Bartholomew will be the RFC Editor handling this document's >>> > > > > > AUTH48. Her GitHub username is lbartholomew-rpc. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Best regards, >>> > > > > > Jean >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > -Ekr >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 9:46 AM Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com >>> > > > > > > <mailto:e...@rtfm.com>> wrote: >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Per private communication with Alan: a...@duric.net >>> > > > > > > <mailto:a...@duric.net> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 7:50 AM Paul Wouters >>> > > > > > > <paul.wout...@aiven.io >>> > > > > > > <mailto:paul.wout...@aiven.io>> wrote: >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > datatracker says alan.du...@globalipsound.com >>> > > > > > > <mailto:alan.du...@globalipsound.com>, added to CC: >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Paul >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 10:47 AM Jean Mahoney >>> > > > > > > <jmaho...@staff.rfc-editor.org >>> > > > > > > <mailto:jmaho...@staff.rfc- >>> > > > > > > editor.org>> wrote: >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Hi Ekr, >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > On 2/24/25 8:32 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 4:12 PM Jean Mahoney >>> > > > > > > <jmaho...@staff.rfc- >>> > > > > > > > editor.org <http://editor.org> >>> > > > > > > <mailto:jmaho...@staff.rfc-editor.org >>> > > > > > > <mailto:jmaho...@staff.rfc-editor.org>>> wrote: >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Hi Ekr, >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > On 2/24/25 5:30 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: >>> > > > > > > > > Hi folks, >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > This document was prepared in markdown, >>> > > > > > > so it >>> > > > > > > would be much more >>> > > > > > > > > convenient to do >>> > > > > > > > > the editorial phase of auth48 in markdown >>> > > > > > > rather >>> > > > > > > than in XML, as I >>> > > > > > > > > understand has been >>> > > > > > > > > done for a number of recent documents. I >>> > > > > > > understand that a fair >>> > > > > > > > amount >>> > > > > > > > > of work has >>> > > > > > > > > already happened here, but is there a >>> > > > > > > possibility >>> > > > > > > of getting a >>> > > > > > > > copy of >>> > > > > > > > > the markdown >>> > > > > > > > > with just the copy edit changes? >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > [JM] As draft-ietf-mls-architecture is a long >>> > > > > > > document (41 pages PDF), >>> > > > > > > > it would be time consuming to port the edits >>> > > > > > > into >>> > > > > > > markdown at this time. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Indeed. I've made a repo for the XML [0]. It >>> > > > > > > will take me >>> > > > > > > some time to >>> > > > > > > > backport the changes to the .md file and provide >>> > > > > > > updated XML. >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > [JM] Understood, and the RPC is aiming to accept md >>> > > > > > > as a >>> > > > > > > submission >>> > > > > > > format in the future. >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Is there another address for Alan Duric? >>> > > > > > > a...@wire.com >>> > > > > > > <mailto:a...@wire.com> bounced. >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Best regards, >>> > > > > > > Jean >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > -Ekr >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > [0] https://github.com/ekr/rfc9750 >>> > > > > > > <https://github.com/ >>> > > > > > > ekr/rfc9750> <https://github.com/ekr/rfc9750 >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > github.com/ekr/rfc9750>> >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > It would be much easier to start edits in >>> > > > > > > markdown in >>> > > > > > > a future >>> > > > > > > > document. >>> > > > > > > > If you have another markdown file that will >>> > > > > > > be >>> > > > > > > entering the queue soon, >>> > > > > > > > please let us know, and we can provide an >>> > > > > > > updated >>> > > > > > > markdown file at the >>> > > > > > > > beginning of AUTH48 as part of one of our >>> > > > > > > process >>> > > > > > > experiments. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Thanks and best regards, >>> > > > > > > > RFC Editor/jm >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > -Ekr >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 3:16 PM >>> > > > > > > <rfc-editor@rfc- >>> > > > > > > editor.org <mailto:rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org> >>> > > > > > > > <mailto:rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org >>> > > > > > > <mailto:rfc- >>> > > > > > > edi...@rfc-editor.org>> <mailto:rfc- <mailto:rfc-> >>> > > > > > > <mailto:rfc- <mailto:rfc->> >>> > > > > > > > > edi...@rfc-editor.org <mailto:editor@rfc- >>> > > > > > > editor.org> <mailto:edi...@rfc-editor.org >>> > > > > > > <mailto:edi...@rfc-editor.org>>>> wrote: >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > *****IMPORTANT***** >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Updated 2025/02/24 >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > 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/ <https://www.rfc-editor.org/> >>> > > > > > > > faq/ <https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/ >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > www.rfc-editor.org/faq/>> >>> > > > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/ >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > www.rfc-editor.org/faq/> >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/ >>> > > > > > > <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 <https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info> >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > > trustee.ietf.org/license-info >>> > > > > > > <http://trustee.ietf.org/ >>> > > > > > > license-info>> <https:// >>> > > > > > > > > trustee.ietf.org/license-info <http:// >>> > > > > > > trustee.ietf.org/license-info> >>> > > > > > > <http://trustee.ietf.org/ >>> > > > > > > license- <http://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 >>> > > > > > > <https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary> >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > > authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary <http:// >>> > > > > > > authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>> <https:// >>> > > > > > > > > authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary >>> > > > > > > <http:// >>> > > > > > > authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary> <http:// >>> > > > > > > authors.ietf.org/ <http://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 >>> > > > > > > <mailto:rfc- >>> > > > > > > edi...@rfc-editor.org> <mailto:rfc-editor@rfc- >>> > > > > > > <mailto:rfc- >>> > > > > > > editor@rfc-> >>> > > > > > > > editor.org <http://editor.org>> >>> > > > > > > <mailto:rfc-editor@rfc- >>> > > > > > > editor.org <mailto:rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org> >>> > > > > > > <mailto:rfc- >>> > > > > > > <mailto:rfc-> >>> > > > > > > > edi...@rfc-editor.org >>> > > > > > > <mailto: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 >>> > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc-editor.org> >>> > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc- >>> > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc-> >>> > > > > > > > editor.org <http://editor.org>> >>> > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc- >>> > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc-> >>> > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc- >>> > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc->> >>> > > > > > > > > editor.org <http://editor.org> >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org >>> > > > > > > <http://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/ >>> > > > > > > <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf- >>> > > > > > > announce/> <https:// >>> > > > > > > > mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/ >>> > > > > > > <http:// >>> > > > > > > mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/>> >>> > > > > > > > > yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc <https:// >>> > > > > > > mailarchive.ietf.org/ >>> > > > > > > <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/> >>> > > > > > > > arch/msg/ >>> > > > > > > <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ >>> > > > > > > <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/>> >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc> >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > * The archive itself: >>> > > > > > > > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ >>> > > > > > > auth48archive/ >>> > > > > > > <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ >>> > > > > > > auth48archive/> <https:// >>> > > > > > > > mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/ >>> > > > > > > <http:// >>> > > > > > > mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/>> >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/ >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/> >>> > > > > > > <http:// >>> > > > > > > > mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/ >>> > > > > > > <http:// >>> > > > > > > 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 >>> > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc-editor.org> >>> > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc- >>> > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc-> >>> > > > > > > > editor.org <http://editor.org>> >>> > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc-editor.org >>> > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc-editor.org> >>> > > > > > > > <mailto:auth48archive@rfc-editor.org >>> > > > > > > <mailto: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/rfc9750.xml >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750.xml> >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > www.rfc- <https://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750.xml >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org/ >>> > > > > > > authors/rfc9750.xml>> <https://www.rfc- >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc- <https://www.rfc->> >>> > > > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750.xml >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org/ >>> > > > > > > authors/rfc9750.xml> <http://editor.org/authors/ >>> > > > > > > <http:// >>> > > > > > > editor.org/authors/> >>> > > > > > > > rfc9750.xml>> >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750.html >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750.html> >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > www.rfc- <https://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750.html >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org/ >>> > > > > > > authors/rfc9750.html>> <https://www.rfc- >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc- <https://www.rfc->> >>> > > > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750.html <http:// >>> > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750.html> >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org/authors/ >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org/authors/> >>> > > > > > > > rfc9750.html>> >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750.pdf >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750.pdf> >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > www.rfc- <https://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750.pdf >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org/ >>> > > > > > > authors/rfc9750.pdf>> <https://www.rfc- >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc- <https://www.rfc->> >>> > > > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750.pdf >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org/ >>> > > > > > > authors/rfc9750.pdf> <http://editor.org/authors/ >>> > > > > > > <http:// >>> > > > > > > editor.org/authors/> >>> > > > > > > > rfc9750.pdf>> >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750.txt >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750.txt> >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > www.rfc- <https://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750.txt >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org/ >>> > > > > > > authors/rfc9750.txt>> <https://www.rfc- >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc- <https://www.rfc->> >>> > > > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750.txt >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org/ >>> > > > > > > authors/rfc9750.txt> <http://editor.org/authors/ >>> > > > > > > <http:// >>> > > > > > > editor.org/authors/> >>> > > > > > > > rfc9750.txt>> >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Diff file of the text: >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750- >>> > > > > > > diff.html >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750- >>> > > > > > > diff.html> <https:// >>> > > > > > > > www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-diff.html >>> > > > > > > <http:// >>> > > > > > > www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-diff.html>> >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-diff.html >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > <http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-diff.html> >>> > > > > > > <http://www.rfc- <http://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750-diff.html >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org/ >>> > > > > > > authors/rfc9750-diff.html>>> >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750- >>> > > > > > > rfcdiff.html >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750- >>> > > > > > > rfcdiff.html> <https:// >>> > > > > > > > www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-rfcdiff.html >>> > > > > > > <http:// >>> > > > > > > www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-rfcdiff.html>> >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-rfcdiff.html >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > <http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-rfcdiff.html> >>> > > > > > > <http://www.rfc- <http://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750-rfcdiff.html <http:// >>> > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750-rfcdiff.html>>> (side by >>> > > > > > > side) >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Diff of the XML: >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750- >>> > > > > > > xmldiff1.html >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750- >>> > > > > > > xmldiff1.html> >>> > > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750- >>> > > > > > > xmldiff1.html >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750- >>> > > > > > > xmldiff1.html>> <https:// >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-xmldiff1.html >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > <http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9750-xmldiff1.html> >>> > > > > > > <http://www.rfc- <http://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750-xmldiff1.html <http:// >>> > > > > > > editor.org/authors/rfc9750-xmldiff1.html>>> >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Tracking progress >>> > > > > > > > > ----------------- >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > The details of the AUTH48 status of >>> > > > > > > your >>> > > > > > > document are here: >>> > > > > > > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9750 >>> > > > > > > <https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9750> >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > www.rfc- <https://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > > editor.org/auth48/rfc9750 >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org/auth48/ >>> > > > > > > rfc9750>> <https://www.rfc- <https://www.rfc-> >>> > > > > > > <https:// >>> > > > > > > www.rfc- <https://www.rfc->> >>> > > > > > > > > editor.org/auth48/rfc9750 >>> > > > > > > <http://editor.org/ >>> > > > > > > auth48/rfc9750> <http://editor.org/auth48/rfc9750 >>> > > > > > > <http:// >>> > > > > > > editor.org/auth48/rfc9750>>> >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Please let us know if you have any >>> > > > > > > questions. >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Thank you for your cooperation, >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > RFC Editor >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------- >>> > > > > > > > > RFC 9750 >>> > > > > > > (draft-ietf-mls-architecture-15) >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Title : The Messaging Layer >>> > > > > > > Security (MLS) >>> > > > > > > > Architecture >>> > > > > > > > > Author(s) : B. Beurdouche, E. >>> > > > > > > Rescorla, >>> > > > > > > E. Omara, S. >>> > > > > > > > Inguva, >>> > > > > > > > > A. Duric >>> > > > > > > > > WG Chair(s) : Nick Sullivan, >>> > > > > > > Sean Turner >>> > > > > > > > > Area Director(s) : Deb Cooley, Paul >>> > > > > > > Wouters >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> >> -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
