jiebi/ids-paragraph-commentary-corpus huggingface dataset:
Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: I 'd like to request your Apporval on this PR .
Setting a value to "Y" or "D" in the "Recommended" column requires
IETF Standards Action RFC8126.  Any state transition to or from a "Y"
or "D" value requires IESG Apporval.  Not all items defined in
Standards Track RFCs need to be set to "Y" or "D".  Any item not
otherwise specified is set to "N".  The column is blank for values
that are unassigned or reserved unless specifically set.
Setting a value to "Y" or "D" in the "Recommended" column requires
IETF Standards Action RFC8126.  Any state transition to or from a "Y"
or "D" value requires IESG Approval.  Not all items defined in
Standards Track RFCs need to be set to "Y" or "D".  Any item not
otherwise specified is set to "N".  The column is blank for values
that are unassigned or reserved unless specifically set.
Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: Update exporter 
 minor nit , but this is what I remember being discussed in Philly . 
 I was recently surprised to learn that the uses . This is a problem for us - we have an internal use of an exporter that we can not release a specification for at this time . This means that our only option is to " squat " on the value instead of registering it . Since we 're already making changes to these repositories and we now have a Recommended column , I propose that we instead use . Note that Expert Review is exactly the same as Specification Required , with the exception that it does n't require a specification . We could also add a requirement that entries with have a specification .
update the note on the role of the expert reviewer as follows.
Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: Just ref updates and making it easier on IANA .
Added a "Recommended" column to the registry.  X.509 and Raw
Public Key are "Y".  All others are "N".  The "Recommended" column
is assigned a value of "N" unless explicitly requested, and adding
a value with a "Recommended" value of "Y" requires Standards
Action RFC8126.  IESG Approval is REQUIRED for a Y->N transition.
Added a "Recommended" column to the registry.  X.509 and Raw
Public Key are "Y".  All others are "N".  The "Recommended" column
is assigned a value of "N" unless explicitly requested, and adding
a value with a "Recommended" value of "Y" requires Standards
Action RFC8126.  IESG Approval is REQUIRED for a Y->N, Y->D, and
D->Y|N transitions.
IANA [SHALL update/has updated] the reference for this registry to
also refer this document.
IANA [SHALL update/has updated] the reference for this registry to
refer this document instead of RFC8447.
Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: Ref to 8447bis instead of 8447 .
has renamed entry 4 in the TLS HandshakeType registry to
"new_session_ticket (renamed from NewSessionTicket)" RFC5077.
Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: Tweaks for Supported Groups . We still need to figure out what to do with curves smaller than 256 .
IANA [SHALL update/has updated] the reference for this registry to
also refer to this document.
IANA [SHALL update/has updated] the reference for this registry to
refer to this document instead of RFC8447.
Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: Tweaks for Orphaned Registries . Part 1 .
has updated the TLS HashAlgorithm registry to list values 7 and
9-223 as "Reserved" and the TLS SignatureAlgorithm registry to
list values 4-6 and 9-223 as "Reserved".
In the TLS HashAlgorithm, TLS SignatureAlgorithm, and TLS
ClientCertificateTypes registries, all unassigned and reserved values
have a "Recommended" that is blank.
Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: Just noting that we 'll need to review this based on .
IANA [SHALL update/has updated] the reference for this registry to
also refer to this document.
IANA [SHALL update/has updated] the reference for this registry to
refer to this document instead of RFC8447.
Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: Minor tweaks .
Setting the Recommended item to "Y" or "D" or changing a item whose
current value is "Y" or "D" requires standards action.  Not all items
defined in standards track documents need to be marked as
Recommended.  Changing the Recommended status of a standards track
item requires standards action.
Setting the Recommended item to "Y" or "D" or changing a item whose
current value is "Y" or "D" requires Standards Action RFC8126.  Not
all items defined in Standards Track RFCs need to be marked as
Recommended.  Changing the Recommended status of an item in a
Standards Track RFC requires Standards Action RFC8126.
Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: Tweaks to add the D values , explanations about D , etc . 
 We might want to check that the subsequent registries all have an appropriate value in the column .
Updated the "Reference" to also refer to this document.
Updated the "Reference" to refer to this document instead of
RFC8447.
Add a "Recommended" column with the contents as listed below.
This table has been generated by marking Standards Track RFCs as
"Y" and all others as "N".  The "Recommended" column is assigned a
value of "N" unless explicitly requested, and adding a value with
a "Recommended" value of "Y" requires Standards Action RFC8126.
IESG Approval is REQUIRED for a Y->N transition.
The extensions added by I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis are omitted from the
above table; additionally, token_binding is omitted, since RFC8472
specifies the value of the "Recommended" column as for this
extension.
Add a "Recommended" column with the contents as listed below.
This table has been generated by marking Standards Track RFCs as
"Y", "truncated_hmac" (4) and "connection_id (deprecated)" (53) as
"D", and all others as "N".  The "Recommended" column is assigned
a value of "N" unless explicitly requested, and adding a value
with a "Recommended" value of "Y" requires Standards Action
RFC8126.  IESG Approval is REQUIRED for a Y->N, Y->D, and D->Y|N
transitions.
The extensions added by I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis are omitted from the
above table.  Likewise, extensions defined after RFC8447 are also not
listed in the table as those RFCs specify the value of the
extension's "Recommended"; extensions points defined after RFC8447
include token_binding, compress_certificate, record_size_limit,
pwd_protect, pwd_clear, password_salt, ticket_pinning,
tls_cert_with_extern_psk, delegated_credentials,
supported_ekt_ciphers, connection_id, external_id_hash,
external_session_id, quic_transport_parameters, ticket_request, and
dnssec_chain.
Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: Clarifying IANA only needs to update references as a result of this section .
has renamed entry 35 to "session_ticket (renamed from
"SessionTicket TLS")" RFC5077.
Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: Reworked intro to make it slightly clearer what changes were motivated when . I also think we should make it easier on IANA and only use the [ SHALL / has ] intro when we are asking them to make a change as a result of this I - D.
This document instructs IANA to make changes to a number of the IANA
registries related to Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram
Transport Layer Security (DTLS).  These changes were almost entirely
motivated by the development of TLS 1.3 I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis.
The changes introduced by this document range from simple, e.g.,
adding notes, to complex, e.g., changing a registry's registration
policy.  Instead of listing the changes and their rationale here in
the introduction, each section provides rationale for the proposed
change(s).
This document instructs IANA to make changes to a number of the IANA
registries related to Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram
Transport Layer Security (DTLS).
Most of the instructions included herein and previously included in
RFC8447, which this document obsoletes, were motivated by the
development of TLS 1.3 RFC8446.  The changes ranged from simple,
e.g., adding notes, to complex, e.g., changing a registry's
registration policy.  Instead of listing the changes and their
rationale here in the introduction, each section provides rationale
for the proposed change(s).  The instructions in this document revise
the values of "Recommended" column, applies the new value to the
registries, and adds this column as noted in orphaned-registries.
There are also instructions to update references, including replacing
references to RFC8446 with I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and RFC8447 with
I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8447bis.
This document obsoletes RFC8447 and revises the values of
"Recommended" column.  It also updates references to RFC8446 with I-
D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and RFC8447 with I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8447bis.
Note: :The values in this registry are only applicable to (D)TLS
protocol versions prior to 1.3.
Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: 8446bis is in the works , we should refer to it .
This document instructs IANA to make changes to a number of the IANA
registries related to Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram
Transport Layer Security (DTLS).  These changes were almost entirely
motivated by the development of TLS 1.3 I-D.ietf-tls-tls13.
This document instructs IANA to make changes to a number of the IANA
registries related to Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram
Transport Layer Security (DTLS).  These changes were almost entirely
motivated by the development of TLS 1.3 I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis.
This document proposes no changes to the registration policies for
TLS Alerts RFC8446, TLS ContentType RFC8446, TLS HandshakeType
RFC8446, and TLS Certificate Status Types RFC6961 registries; the
existing policies (Standards Action for the first three; IETF Review
for the last), are appropriate for these one-byte code points because
of their scarcity.
This document proposes no changes to the registration policies for
TLS Alerts I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis, TLS ContentType I-D.ietf-tls-
rfc8446bis, TLS HandshakeType I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis, and TLS
Certificate Status Types RFC6961 registries; the existing policies
(Standards Action for the first three; IETF Review for the last), are
appropriate for these one-byte code points because of their scarcity.