On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 2:17 AM Alanna Paloma <apal...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: > Thank you for your reply. Your approval regarding the BCP 14 key word update > has been noted on the AUTH48 status page: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9762 > > Please note that we are still awaiting the outcome of the discussion proposed > by Jen: > > >> 6) <!-- [rfced] *AD and authors - There is an open erratum report against > >> RFC > >> 4861 regarding the text that is being updated in Section 9.1 of this > >> document. Are any updates needed? > >> > >> See https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8055. > >> --> > > > > There is no conflict in spirit between the filed erratum and this > > document. But if the erratum is approved then the text of this > > document should be updated to reflect the erratum, and say: > > “Note: If none of the M, O, or P (draft-ietf-6man-pio-pflag) flags are > > set, this indicates that no information is available via DHCPv6 from > > the router, or from other nodes that the router has been made aware > > of". > > > > With my 6MAN chair hat on: let the chairs discuss it with the AD. I > > think it would be better if the decision for the erratum is made > > before this draft is published.
I believe Erik marked the erratum as 'Held for the document update'. So the text in RFC4861 is not going to change, and we can proceed with this draft. > > On May 12, 2025, at 11:08 PM, Erik Kline <ek.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > LGTM; thank you! > > > > On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 8:25 AM Alanna Paloma <apal...@staff.rfc-editor.org> > > wrote: > > Hi Authors and Erik (AD)*, > > > > *Erik (AD) - This is another friendly reminder that we are awaiting your > > review and approval regarding the BCP 14 key word update from “MUST not” to > > “MUST NOT” in the sentence below: > > > > Original: > > In particular, enabling or disabling the P flag MUST not trigger > > automatic changes in the A flag value set by the router. > > > > Current: > > In particular, enabling or disabling the P flag MUST NOT trigger > > automatic changes in the A flag value set by the router. > > > > See this diff file: > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762-auth48diff.html > > > > Additionally, we are still awaiting word regarding this query: > > >> 6) <!-- [rfced] *AD and authors - There is an open erratum report > > >> against RFC > > >> 4861 regarding the text that is being updated in Section 9.1 of this > > >> document. Are any updates needed? > > >> > > >> See https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8055. > > >> --> > > > > > > There is no conflict in spirit between the filed erratum and this > > > document. But if the erratum is approved then the text of this > > > document should be updated to reflect the erratum, and say: > > > “Note: If none of the M, O, or P (draft-ietf-6man-pio-pflag) flags are > > > set, this indicates that no information is available via DHCPv6 from > > > the router, or from other nodes that the router has been made aware > > > of". > > > > > > With my 6MAN chair hat on: let the chairs discuss it with the AD. I > > > think it would be better if the decision for the erratum is made > > > before this draft is published. > > > > > > Authors - We will await any further updates you may have as well as > > approvals from each party listed on the AUTH48 status page below prior to > > moving this document forward in the publication process. > > > > The files have been posted here (please refresh): > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762.txt > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762.pdf > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762.html > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762.xml > > > > The relevant diff files are posted here: > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762-diff.html (comprehensive diff) > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762-auth48diff.html (all AUTH48 > > changes) > > > > Please see the AUTH48 status page for this document here: > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9762 > > > > Thank you, > > RFC Editor/ap > > > > > On Apr 25, 2025, at 9:54 AM, Alanna Paloma <apal...@staff.rfc-editor.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Authors and Erik (AD)*, > > > > > > *Erik (AD) - This is a friendly reminder that we are awaiting your review > > > and approval regarding the BCP 14 key word update from “MUST not” to > > > “MUST NOT” in the sentence below: > > > > > > Original: > > > In particular, enabling or disabling the P flag MUST not trigger > > > automatic changes in the A flag value set by the router. > > > > > > Current: > > > In particular, enabling or disabling the P flag MUST NOT trigger > > > automatic changes in the A flag value set by the router. > > > > > > See this diff file: > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762-auth48diff.html > > > > > > Additionally, we are still awaiting word regarding this query: > > >>> 6) <!-- [rfced] *AD and authors - There is an open erratum report > > >>> against RFC > > >>> 4861 regarding the text that is being updated in Section 9.1 of this > > >>> document. Are any updates needed? > > >>> > > >>> See https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8055. > > >>> --> > > >> > > >> There is no conflict in spirit between the filed erratum and this > > >> document. But if the erratum is approved then the text of this > > >> document should be updated to reflect the erratum, and say: > > >> “Note: If none of the M, O, or P (draft-ietf-6man-pio-pflag) flags are > > >> set, this indicates that no information is available via DHCPv6 from > > >> the router, or from other nodes that the router has been made aware > > >> of". > > >> > > >> With my 6MAN chair hat on: let the chairs discuss it with the AD. I > > >> think it would be better if the decision for the erratum is made > > >> before this draft is published. > > > > > > > > > Authors - We will await any further changes you may have and approvals > > > from each author and the *AD prior to moving forward in the publication > > > process. > > > > > > The files have been posted here (please refresh): > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762.txt > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762.pdf > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762.html > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762.xml > > > > > > The relevant diff files are posted here: > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762-diff.html (comprehensive diff) > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9762-auth48diff.html (all AUTH48 > > > changes) > > > > > > Please see the AUTH48 status page for this document here: > > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9762 > > > > > > Thank you, > > > RFC Editor/ap > > > > > -- Cheers, Jen Linkova -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
