AUTH48 Using kramdown-rfc

This page provides instructions and information regarding the AUTH48 process for a document that has been edited in kramdown-rfc. For information on the pilot test, please see “RPC Pilot Test: Editing and AUTH48 in kramdown-rfc”.

This process requires two approvals from the authors during AUTH48: one for the content review and a final one that includes approval of the formatting and the outputs of XML.

When the document enters AUTH48, the authors should review the document content for accuracy and comprehension. Any needed updates should be sent to the RPC per the "Submitting updates" section below. Note that format-related updates that impact the content may be updated during this time.

At this stage, updates will be made in the kramdown-rfc file.

Authors should pay particular attention to the following:

• RFC Editor questions
  Authors should review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor. These question are sent by email and also included in the .md file as comments marked as follows:

  <!-- [rfced] ... -->

• Changes submitted by coauthors
  Authors should review any changes submitted by their coauthors. The RPC assumes that if an author does not speak up that they agree to changes submitted by their coauthors.

• Content
  Authors should review the full content of the document, as this cannot change once the RFC is published. They should pay particular attention to:
  • IANA considerations updates (if applicable)
  • contact information
  • references

• Copyright notices and legends
  Authors should review the copyright notice and legends as defined in RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions (TLP – https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).

Once all of the authors have approved the content, the RPC will a) convert the kramdown-rfc file to RFCXML, b) format the document, and c) provide the XML, TXT, HTML, and PDF outputs for authors to review. Any needed updates should be sent to the RPC per the "Submitting updates" section below.

At this stage, all changes will be applied in the XML file.

Authors should pay particular attention to the following:

• Semantic markup
  Authors should 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
  Authors should review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is reasonable. Note that the TXT will have formatting limitations compared to the PDF and HTML.

For both content and format-related updates, authors should reply to the AUTH48 email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as all the parties CCed on the message need to see the changes. The parties include:

• coauthors
• rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org (the RPC team)
• other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g., IETF Stream participants include working group chairs, the responsible ADs, and the document shepherd).
• auth48archive@rfc-editor.org, which is an 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, an author may temporarily opt out of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive matter). If needed, the author should add a note at the top of the message indicating that they 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.

Authors may submit changes in one of two ways:

• An update to the provided .md file
• An explicit list of changes in this format:

  Section # (or indicate Global)
  
  OLD:
  old text
  
  NEW:
  new text

Authors do not need to reply with both an updated .md file and an explicit list of changes, as either form is sufficient.

The RPC 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.

To approve the RFC for publication, all authors should reply to the AUTH48 email stating that they approve the RFC. Please use ‘REPLY ALL’, as all the parties CCed on the message need to see the approval.

Coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties (e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing approval.

Note that if an author is no longer available, there are several remedies available as listed in the FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/).

The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfcXXXX (where XXXX is the RFC number)

The AUTH48 email contains a direct link.