Hello Sarah, Find our reply to your questions inline.
On 9/11/25 23:20, Sarah Tarrant wrote:
Author(s), [...] 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 is still accurate?
Yes.
* Are the References, Authors' Addresses, Contributors, and Acknowledgments sections current?
Yes
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? If so, please provide a pointer to that document (e.g., this document's terminology should match DNS terminology in RFC 9499).
There is no specific terminology document our document is based on. However, the terminology for CoAP is based on RFC7252, the terminology for ALPN IDs is based on RFC7301, and the terminology for SVCB is based on RFC9460.
* Is there a pattern of capitalization or formatting of terms? (e.g., field names should have initial capitalization; parameter names should be in double quotes; <tt/> should be used for token names; etc.)
Please refer to the documents above for formatting decisions.
3) Is there any text that should be handled extra cautiously? For example, are there any sections that were contentious when the document was drafted?
No.
4) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while editing this document?
No.
5) 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.
Since we edited the draft originally in kramdown-rfc, yes. Kind regards Martine Lenders on behalf of all co-authors
On Sep 11, 2025, at 4:13 PM, rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org wrote: Author(s), Your document draft-ietf-core-coap-dtls-alpn-05, which has been approved for publication as an RFC, has been added to the RFC Editor queue <https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php>. If your XML file was submitted using the I-D submission tool <https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/>, we have already retrieved it and have started working on it. If you did not submit the file via the I-D submission tool, or if you have an updated version (e.g., updated contact information), please send us the file at this time by attaching it in your reply to this message and specifying any differences between the approved I-D and the file that you are providing. You will receive a separate message from us asking for style input. Please respond to that message. When we have received your response, your document will then move through the queue. The first step that we take as your document moves through the queue is converting it to RFCXML (if it is not already in RFCXML) and applying the formatting steps listed at <https://www.rfc-editor.org/pubprocess/how-we-update/>. Next, we will edit for clarity and apply the style guide (<https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/>). You can check the status of your document at <https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php>. You will receive automatic notifications as your document changes queue state (for more information about these states, please see <https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/queue/>). When we have completed our edits, we will move your document to AUTH48 state and ask you to perform a final review of the document. Please let us know if you have any questions. Thank you. The RFC Editor Team
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
-- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
