From nobody Sat Mar 1 11:21:57 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D46691A0A5E for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 11:21:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.147 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id llPABLl7xmJL for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 11:21:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from egssmtp03.att.com (egssmtp03.att.com [144.160.128.152]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D06DD1A0A50 for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 11:21:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgw1.maillennium.att.com (maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by egssmtp03.att.com ( egs 8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s21JLmKl025186 for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 11:21:50 -0800 Received: from vpn-135-70-98-134.vpn.swst.att.com ([135.70.98.134]) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with ESMTP id <20140301192147gw100j0c2de>; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 19:21:48 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [135.70.98.134] Message-ID: <5312334A.2080007@att.com> Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 14:21:46 -0500 From: Tony Hansen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Aamer Akhter (aakhter)" , "tools-discuss@ietf.org" References: <75C0E47A1889264493A2DCB2869AC09633C213C0@xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <75C0E47A1889264493A2DCB2869AC09633C213C0@xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/djwnFipBvxo-hNdK8ZnKOUXHe4c Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] xml2rfc service on http://xml.resource.org/cgi-bin/xml2rfc.cgi unresponsive X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 19:21:55 -0000 There was an issue with the server that affected lots of tools. Henrik fixed it about 3pm UTC. Tony Hansen On 2/28/14, 9:32 PM, Aamer Akhter (aakhter) wrote: > Hi Folks, > > The xml2rfc service at: > http://xml.resource.org/cgi-bin/xml2rfc.cgi > > seems to be unresponsive. > > 1. Is there an alternative? > > 2. Any ideas on when it might come back? > > 3. For the local run, I'm looking for an updated > http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3.zip > but same problem w/ the website etc. > > Thoughts? > > aa > > From nobody Sat Mar 1 12:31:03 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0752E1A02DC for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 12:31:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.048 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.048 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x63iJQmkk8zA for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 12:30:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E95FF1A02B3 for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 12:30:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=611; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1393705856; x=1394915456; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=xGgONblGy7eKHEiK3wpDRdLGB59rkf2jHxAaDIP/XpY=; b=S42DoevKJ7rxET5vk3HyoncN3iq0jMnF6vps/85zgl9b+pE6VbPt4Hkw b8CGnyveWzc7bUtw1IaFDd/5iiymfWVJj/XJ22C4bgtb/CabqKfJxKgzh IvUhO9bXliyNu5HuSIZxlIUy6kN7aqXLn95CBqYk3BUgWYCjlmGry35t7 Y=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhkFAFlCElOtJXG+/2dsb2JhbABagwY7V8EggRMWdIIlAQEBBDpLBgEIEQQBAQsUQh0JAQQTCIdxDZwwr1kXjig+gx6BFASjIYF2hVCDLYIq X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,569,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="24206428" Received: from rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com ([173.37.113.190]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Mar 2014 20:30:56 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com [173.37.183.79]) by rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s21KUusP006835 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 20:30:56 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com ([169.254.5.9]) by xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com ([173.37.183.79]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 14:30:56 -0600 From: "Aamer Akhter (aakhter)" To: "tools-discuss@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: xml2rfc service on http://xml.resource.org/cgi-bin/xml2rfc.cgi unresponsive Thread-Index: Ac8087WeXzuKS/RrRMSDCIP5tFILDwAgxXFA Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2014 20:30:55 +0000 Message-ID: <75C0E47A1889264493A2DCB2869AC09633C23555@xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.21.104.209] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/5HGAllsJEIG9B67Vxck5prFRbJQ Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] xml2rfc service on http://xml.resource.org/cgi-bin/xml2rfc.cgi unresponsive X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 20:31:02 -0000 Seems to be back up.=20 -----Original Message----- From: Aamer Akhter (aakhter)=20 Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 9:17 PM To: 'tools-discuss@ietf.org' Subject: xml2rfc service on http://xml.resource.org/cgi-bin/xml2rfc.cgi unr= esponsive Hi Folks, The xml2rfc service at: http://xml.resource.org/cgi-bin/xml2rfc.cgi seems to be unresponsive.=20 1. Is there an alternative? 2. Any ideas on when it might come back?=20 3. For the local run, I'm looking for an updated=20 http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3.zip=09 but same problem w/ the website etc. Thoughts?=20 aa From nobody Sat Mar 1 12:32:29 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B201A1A02DC for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 12:32:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.048 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.048 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iZPO4jAL64gP for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 12:32:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 213921A02B3 for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 12:32:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=436; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1393705943; x=1394915543; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=Apy+hQ2dVw0VsSh2CNs97OM9hr0sbCrJWCHVuBrZ/ck=; b=OpYh6f5Q0ARxbFCXVLmeZemLb0ZWxNqJQMb54IUeinxhM3Izk9Q8gNcO MhB4zhjEpSLLk11Yx7bEborhcXVqGHM+UYqMMcu2+Lk/WDHqKqNJRQq0s GJeP2uQJvd97vSewhSzV2ymE3GTnqQk5SOAgpftH4Mjq4XFCgYMAeCcDP w=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhoFAJBDElOtJV2c/2dsb2JhbABagwY7V8EggRMWdIIlAQEBBDpLBAIBCBEEAQELFAkHMhQJCAEBBAESCIdxDcwIF44oOAaDHoEUAQOjIYdGgW+BPoIq X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,569,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="24198578" Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Mar 2014 20:32:22 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x09.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x09.cisco.com [173.37.183.83]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s21KWMsU003232 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sat, 1 Mar 2014 20:32:22 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com ([169.254.5.9]) by xhc-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([173.37.183.83]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 14:32:22 -0600 From: "Aamer Akhter (aakhter)" To: Tony Hansen , "tools-discuss@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Tools-discuss] xml2rfc service on http://xml.resource.org/cgi-bin/xml2rfc.cgi unresponsive Thread-Index: Ac8087WeXzuKS/RrRMSDCIP5tFILDwAwhFQAAAofPHA= Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2014 20:32:21 +0000 Message-ID: <75C0E47A1889264493A2DCB2869AC09633C235C2@xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com> References: <75C0E47A1889264493A2DCB2869AC09633C213C0@xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com> <5312334A.2080007@att.com> In-Reply-To: <5312334A.2080007@att.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.21.104.209] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/n_vahRr7nhyjhThriheWJddYmMY Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] xml2rfc service on http://xml.resource.org/cgi-bin/xml2rfc.cgi unresponsive X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 20:32:27 -0000 Absolutely appreciate it! Thanks! aa -----Original Message----- From: Tony Hansen [mailto:tony@att.com]=20 Sent: Saturday, March 1, 2014 2:22 PM To: Aamer Akhter (aakhter); tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] xml2rfc service on http://xml.resource.org/cgi= -bin/xml2rfc.cgi unresponsive There was an issue with the server that affected lots of tools. Henrik fixe= d it about 3pm UTC. Tony Hansen From nobody Mon Mar 3 02:43:20 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6AF21A0EB3 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 02:43:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.048 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.048 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2GLMIvAyH1Fs for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 02:43:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABF441A0E57 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 02:43:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=326; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1393843390; x=1395052990; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=efRczpr/Vm/JthyQAce5NW2TdVKEyLPANfLPGVbzGWc=; b=VF28IH6fK0A9mzStN8aPPCbDuuMFPoYh9o98EigWF4gSnmFiymEQ34Sb i5cqioh9saPfjdHPBTYUL0aqClVtZAaOK3ub0+ux+Y4n5u/5WQbptYQ18 w3Wh3rEihmgniKzoDrk5vAfNFsOn6vbyL9+TxPkQxvWwedzpANa+W0dZ+ I=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgIFAGpcFFOtJXHA/2dsb2JhbABagwY7V8BOgR8WdIInAQQ6UQEqFEImAQQbh3GcTK9uF44og1yBFASqZ4Mtgio X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,577,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="307631977" Received: from rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com ([173.37.113.192]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 03 Mar 2014 10:42:56 +0000 Received: from xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com [173.36.12.88]) by rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s23AguPY002141 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 10:42:56 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com ([169.254.5.9]) by xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com ([173.36.12.88]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 04:42:56 -0600 From: "Aamer Akhter (aakhter)" To: "tools-discuss@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: xml2rfc gui tool and windows CR vs just LF Thread-Index: Ac82yQQ0L9GBx+WHSlyH2xHEtgWlGQ== Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 10:42:56 +0000 Message-ID: <75C0E47A1889264493A2DCB2869AC09633C2B8EF@xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.81.8.194] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/Ju06eEmT7USHAtboba6bLDehT1k Subject: [Tools-discuss] xml2rfc gui tool and windows CR vs just LF X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 10:43:14 -0000 Hello, I've been playing around with the xml2rfc tool under a windows environment.= =20 I've noticed that the txt output from the tool uses \r\r\n at the end of a= line rather than the simple \n that the web service on xml.resource.org do= es.=20 Is there a reason why we want to keep this difference?=20 aa From stephan.dahlmann@gmail.com Sat Feb 22 07:16:14 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D93CA1A010A for ; Sat, 22 Feb 2014 07:16:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sth6Qpi3idMu for ; Sat, 22 Feb 2014 07:16:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ee0-x22a.google.com (mail-ee0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c00::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE45D1A0108 for ; Sat, 22 Feb 2014 07:16:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ee0-f42.google.com with SMTP id e53so639823eek.1 for ; Sat, 22 Feb 2014 07:16:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=llm+yHa6M05rykdzFpYce5+PopaRURxVM/AtWZyRs00=; b=O5DhvNIB6CmTNnEPs9psH9i0yu4UTn4t+jkioj5U6STzVmAbQOSiKOf/W7NX3L4PqE +jwCQ0Wa/puInaT8sfw0dvLSWtoA32B24Oudw1qEDRgHe4EUyDpUsaVsh7S03Cwpm/SM OVLNsCHwrzqOE/o7aQnOgPHCz1JfjokqkugON3cUmqhhcZl2/d4VPozmkMOHU1htT8JC C06D7rpOWrVM5ZA0sBWyMVRnNPeVnWw2wfNxnsG0M6x0NdxheSem2JnAADeXw1VMMvaX ejd02/n37a3SFKxaJOSYDcX3hLNFdt62/fVDabhM3gdQ6SHrtWiueKf17LDAKxpmg4lo IR4Q== X-Received: by 10.15.10.7 with SMTP id f7mr12969010eet.86.1393082168010; Sat, 22 Feb 2014 07:16:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2003:7a:a92f:e700:d9e9:2e52:7ef1:f50f? (p2003007AA92FE700D9E92E527EF1F50F.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:7a:a92f:e700:d9e9:2e52:7ef1:f50f]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id m8sm29921546eef.14.2014.02.22.07.16.06 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 22 Feb 2014 07:16:06 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <5308BF2F.3000409@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2014 16:15:59 +0100 From: Stephan Dahlmann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-discuss@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/IFb-3IYkFVI671s-dVyEetjg45g X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 08:56:54 -0800 Subject: [Tools-discuss] RFC PDF generator creates blank sites X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2014 15:20:03 -0000 Hi, I hope this is the right address for this: The generator for the PDF files (e.g. for RFCs) seems to be broken. Every second page is a blank page, except for the page number and author. Examples: http://tools.ietf.org/pdf/rfc4193.pdf http://tools.ietf.org/pdf/rfc2460.pdf http://tools.ietf.org/pdf/rfc7045.pdf It seems to be broken for about a week now, I have a PDF of RFC 7045 that does not have this problem (it has full pages). This really makes quoting RFCs with page numbers difficult :) Best Regards Stephan Dahlmann From nobody Mon Mar 3 08:56:58 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C77201A0185 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 08:12:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8-zyhV_xfI8L for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 08:12:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe14:43:76:96:62:96]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32D581A00B6 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 08:12:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from omta24.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.76]) by qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id Z1nK1n00F1ei1Bg594ClcK; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 16:12:45 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com ([24.34.72.61]) by omta24.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id Z4Ck1n00e1KKtkw3k4CkrN; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 16:12:45 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com (hobgoblin.ariadne.com [127.0.0.1]) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s23GCimL013423; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 11:12:44 -0500 Received: (from worley@localhost) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id s23GChUP013422; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 11:12:43 -0500 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 11:12:43 -0500 Message-Id: <201403031612.s23GChUP013422@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> From: worley@alum.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley) Sender: worley@alum.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley) To: "Aamer Akhter \(aakhter\)" In-reply-to: <75C0E47A1889264493A2DCB2869AC09633C2B8EF@xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com> (aakhter@cisco.com) References: <75C0E47A1889264493A2DCB2869AC09633C2B8EF@xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1393863165; bh=qfEHEIVINtoulSv1DfHJStsnQa/0UMQjWpNch4FRLec=; h=Received:Received:Received:Received:Date:Message-Id:From:To: Subject; b=tDYQuM7ZtQwccQHVIKwu7eFqiDv0rRGkNL/4CAt5+Yo4Y6eBEMqvpiApSajgTX8xf EJWYTjGIwvVZKKqK5zA6KrxGASPx1ngdlWXTC6RtfTnM0WoWdDz7HaINa1i+5hvbcZ Lnk++JP8GA8mMain1/gmUWkW0T0veINFVHGsGNAnXBdoMrd2n5yoVCw+y10hy9hdUn 5IeuoAxSLKFhzSSMymMs8nyFwrwBTu35g3K0V4Au4l49guFlTjX1uQe1/LDTKTyc7s WGjCYN4u444BjpjbKR72FS/jO7GZZ99CFSvYPJUfePyOz6aRUHNdHks1TTkTlxRVbq IFuFnkWzCbbJw== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/aILjGjnspTLvZJH8jytALr_tbWA X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 08:56:54 -0800 Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] xml2rfc gui tool and windows CR vs just LF X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 16:12:51 -0000 > From: "Aamer Akhter (aakhter)" > > I've been playing around with the xml2rfc tool under a windows environment. > > I've noticed that the txt output from the tool uses \r\r\n at the > end of a line rather than the simple \n that the web service on > xml.resource.org does. I'm no expert, but "\r\r\n" is not a standard EOL sequence for any OS. It sounds like the underlying code is generating "\r\n", but some wrapping layer thinks it has to turn "\n" into "\r\n". I'd check the settings on the environment wrapper and on xml2rfc; it looks like they're both fretting about the Windows environment. Dale From nobody Mon Mar 3 12:02:18 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C77FD1A0315 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 12:02:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.146 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.146 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.347, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s3rzDQ_ZlHp7 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 12:02:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from TheWorld.com (pcls6.std.com [192.74.137.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69D581A0235 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 12:02:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from shell.TheWorld.com (svani@shell01.theworld.com [192.74.137.71]) by TheWorld.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s23K1me7026954 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 15:01:51 -0500 Received: from shell01.TheWorld.com (localhost.theworld.com [127.0.0.1]) by shell.TheWorld.com (8.13.6/8.12.8) with ESMTP id s23K1gBr6149486 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 15:01:42 -0500 (EST) Received: (from worley@localhost) by shell01.TheWorld.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id s23K1eUK6144644; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 15:01:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 15:01:40 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <201403032001.s23K1eUK6144644@shell01.TheWorld.com> From: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) Sender: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) To: tools-discuss@ietf.org Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/a2A89fiYTidnYjUCjuVSM1V46JA Subject: [Tools-discuss] IDNITS checker fails X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 20:02:11 -0000 While I was trying to check the nits on an Internet-Draft, I ran into a strange failure of the on-line IDNITS checker. To see it work: Copy draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-11.txt into a file of that name. Go to http://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits/. Use Browse to find the file, click "Check file". Result is a nits report on the file. To see it fail: Copy draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-11.txt into a file named draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-11, that is, omitting the extension ".txt". Go to http://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits/. Use Browse to find the file, click "Check file". Result is the IDNITS tool submission form, that is, no report or error message at all. (This is with Firefox 27.0 running on Linux.) Dale From nobody Thu Mar 6 05:24:51 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDC2B1A0228 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 05:24:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.979 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GzZLNd10Onzz for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 05:24:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vc0-f177.google.com (mail-vc0-f177.google.com [209.85.220.177]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28D9C1A0073 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 05:24:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id if11so2489470vcb.8 for ; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 05:24:44 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=6SnSHQSMvMkEtOnDpEbttFdFPcDSQ4R4DccLRLqrVVU=; b=En3ga6gd1TZRkH5lkW11KmE9oSd/j1T2xEQcAjjQCrmfxMmrxidJlMhrdMggU49o9M QYHEkjRJ558BYvNbk1MKx2oWuZOAqpyDCVrRhnHu+PPOWUEAFwBSqidanOAG5nXXCBBl N2iniF+OK4/8sY580FYAuSPSIhN2+yz5r2RE6nPrmzJWQS+TUG9oCHJAYdb1qqkv2+zR Zj/jjkpt8KPRN6v78xvijTMOiTYV6lXTXLpMaTG55nPJzmaUrRxN9eyf146gCfDTY4yN Mk5UkXxva6OXEChR5aCEbUgtXNWFSxdVnRo6gWIMRrEQXoT4fEf5b4kqGdBw4K5YykAk gl4g== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk5aUtXZOZo8MoRmpbCwS3bw0l4BgW8RDM1msGNe8Z0KS83V96zc6NCqZmfbB+fX9H7fp7P X-Received: by 10.221.22.71 with SMTP id qv7mr89707vcb.34.1394112283977; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 05:24:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.59.7.67 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 05:24:23 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20140205195433.22172.9016.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Ole Laursen Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:24:23 +0100 Message-ID: To: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/tILpvY43UK3Htaob0zSddO0Ba4A Cc: Tools Team Discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Bad escaping in abstracts in i-d-announce messages X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 13:24:50 -0000 2014-02-05 22:08 GMT+01:00 Paul Hoffman : >> This document is a summary of the style conventions and editorial >> policies that apply to the the RFC Series. It captures the RFC >> Editor's fundamental requirements and offers guidance regarding the >> style and structure of an RFC. Guidance provided by this document >> will not be applied until published as an RFC. Please send your >> comments about the contents of this document to <rfc-interest@rfc- >> editor.org>. Just for the record, Ryan opened a ticket on the bug here and assigned himself: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb/ticket/1353 Ole From nobody Mon Mar 10 01:35:29 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43A301A03FF for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 01:35:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.762 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.762 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id esJeC78paooG for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 01:35:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp [133.2.253.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA79E1A0403 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 01:35:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.253.231]) by scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id s2A8Z2xZ029996 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:35:02 +0900 Received: from (unknown [133.2.206.134]) by scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp with smtp id 3cd5_2819_dfdd87ae_a82e_11e3_b388_001e6722eec2; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:35:02 +0900 Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [133.2.210.1]) by itmail2.it.aoyama.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3026DBF53F for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:35:02 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <531D7930.4050802@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:34:56 +0900 From: =?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiBKLiBEw7xyc3Qi?= Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-discuss@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/gQvPyKiEiXU3FN1xxaBT5-8DTX0 Subject: [Tools-discuss] Obsoleted by links on tools.ietf.org/html/rfc... X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 08:35:26 -0000 Dear IETF tools experts, Very recently, https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7158 was obsoleted after less than one day of existence by https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7159, because the publication date on the former was one year off. The RFC Editor fortunately was careful enough to say that RFC 7159 not only obsoletes RFC 7158, but also RFC 4627. Unfortunately, the version of RFC 4627 at tools.ietf.org/html only has "Obsoleted by: 7158", which makes (attentive) readers click two links to get to RFC 7159. This may be the result of some kind of caching effect, or there may be some logic behind this, although in the case at hand, this logic would be suboptimal. I hope this can be fixed. Ideally, RFC 4627 should only say "Obsoleted by: 7159", because the obsoletion of RFC 4627 in RFC 7158 has been obsoleted by RFC 7159, and because that's the only information relevant to any readers except historians of RFC publication blunders. Regards, Martin. From nobody Mon Mar 10 05:42:11 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D0611A0436 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 05:42:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.147 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LynD28l8G6Na for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 05:42:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 738441A043E for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 05:42:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netb ([89.204.153.59]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MYfJW-1WjYQz0Tre-00VQXn; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:41:33 +0100 From: Bjoern Hoehrmann To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst=22?= Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:41:24 +0100 Message-ID: References: <531D7930.4050802@it.aoyama.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: <531D7930.4050802@it.aoyama.ac.jp> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:rn+ZN7Q4G0aOuDSGtp//g1TkLrIEY0lWmkJ7TI8A1ChD3Y+3d09 16pWxeddniwmFZ+ijCDY5DqhblLsjmUbrnnCDpkJ+6wwmzSVIVQ1Y89hxuIypawfc3T+DsZ 1dI4CQdfnNXwJNQ/R5kIuO1xglLYgHpGAJL3Ez8zzIEqZ8y92llXQr5aMbWILkOi96D1/b0 fUw7MG2q6U7jXEzwPPo/g== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/U29FPVr0zJQxZx5TbUEiCs02KlU Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Obsoleted by links on tools.ietf.org/html/rfc... X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:42:07 -0000 * Martin J. Dürst wrote: >The RFC Editor fortunately was careful enough to say that RFC 7159 not >only obsoletes RFC 7158, but also RFC 4627. Unfortunately, the version >of RFC 4627 at tools.ietf.org/html only has "Obsoleted by: 7158", which >makes (attentive) readers click two links to get to RFC 7159. This may >be the result of some kind of caching effect, or there may be some logic >behind this, although in the case at hand, this logic would be suboptimal. I prefer breadcrumbs and being able to follow the paper trail. This case is unfortunate, but I don't think accomodating it is necessary or good. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ From nobody Mon Mar 10 23:15:26 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A04B31A0645 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 23:15:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.346 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.346 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=1.592, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QO9gxQR-PLZg for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 23:15:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp [133.2.253.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B76A41A0641 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 23:15:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.253.231]) by scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id s2B6EmeS014925; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:14:50 +0900 Received: from (unknown [133.2.206.134]) by scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp with smtp id 6053_e0f6_72d4e3bc_a8e4_11e3_bbb6_001e6722eec2; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:14:47 +0900 Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [133.2.210.1]) by itmail2.it.aoyama.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18A2BBF4BB; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:14:47 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <531E7589.2000509@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 11:31:37 +0900 From: =?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiBKLiBEw7xyc3Qi?= Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bjoern Hoehrmann References: <531D7930.4050802@it.aoyama.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/GIC-tMl6829NFd2RnD-j7ur3yiA Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Obsoleted by links on tools.ietf.org/html/rfc... X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 06:15:10 -0000 On 2014/03/10 21:41, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * Martin J. D=C3=BCrst wrote: >> The RFC Editor fortunately was careful enough to say that RFC 7159 not >> only obsoletes RFC 7158, but also RFC 4627. Unfortunately, the version >> of RFC 4627 at tools.ietf.org/html only has "Obsoleted by: 7158", whic= h >> makes (attentive) readers click two links to get to RFC 7159. This may >> be the result of some kind of caching effect, or there may be some log= ic >> behind this, although in the case at hand, this logic would be subopti= mal. > > I prefer breadcrumbs and being able to follow the paper trail. That should also be possible, but shouldn't our main goal be to let=20 users find the current spec easily? > This case > is unfortunate, but I don't think accomodating it is necessary or good. There are two aspects. The first aspect is that RFC 7159 explicitly says=20 that it obsoletes RFC 4627, but the current tools html version of it=20 doesn't mention this at all. Suppressing such information doesn't make=20 sense to me, and as I wrote, I guess this is caused by a caching issue=20 or a logical bug. I hope you agree with me that this should be fixed. The second issue is whether to remove the information that RFC 4627 was=20 obsoleted by RFC 7158 from the tools html version of RFC 4627. This is=20 desirable from the viewpoint of trying to avoid confusion for the=20 average visitor, but it may make it slightly more difficult to follow=20 every minor turn of the "paper trail". It may also be a special case=20 that may not justify investing additional time. Regards, Martin. From nobody Tue Mar 11 01:58:56 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8B111A03D9 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:58:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K--yeBvJ_opV for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:58:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3110D1A03DB for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:58:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57220 helo=vigonier.tools.ietf.org ident=henrik) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WNIWF-0006i8-3d; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:58:39 +0100 Message-ID: <531ED03E.6070405@levkowetz.com> Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:58:38 +0100 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiBKLiBEw7xyc3Qi?= , Bjoern Hoehrmann References: <531D7930.4050802@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <531E7589.2000509@it.aoyama.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: <531E7589.2000509@it.aoyama.ac.jp> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp, derhoermi@gmx.net, tools-discuss@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/9zIDov8ca_A5j9Pkzvel8J9C_9c Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Obsoleted by links on tools.ietf.org/html/rfc... X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:58:54 -0000 Hi Martin, On 2014-03-11 03:31 "Martin J. Dürst" said the following: > On 2014/03/10 21:41, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: >> * Martin J. Dürst wrote: >>> The RFC Editor fortunately was careful enough to say that RFC 7159 not >>> only obsoletes RFC 7158, but also RFC 4627. Unfortunately, the version >>> of RFC 4627 at tools.ietf.org/html only has "Obsoleted by: 7158", which >>> makes (attentive) readers click two links to get to RFC 7159. This may >>> be the result of some kind of caching effect, or there may be some logic >>> behind this, although in the case at hand, this logic would be suboptimal. >> >> I prefer breadcrumbs and being able to follow the paper trail. > > That should also be possible, but shouldn't our main goal be to let > users find the current spec easily? > >> This case >> is unfortunate, but I don't think accomodating it is necessary or good. > > There are two aspects. The first aspect is that RFC 7159 explicitly says > that it obsoletes RFC 4627, but the current tools html version of it > doesn't mention this at all.> Suppressing such information doesn't make > sense to me, and as I wrote, I guess this is caused by a caching issue > or a logical bug. I hope you agree with me that this should be fixed. It was fixed days ago. Htmlizing the drafts is a sufficiently heavy- weight process that the htmlized documents are cached on disk until they either time out, a removal is triggered by a state change, or they are refreshed manually. In this case, the publication of 7158 triggered one refresh, and another was coming for 7159. > The second issue is whether to remove the information that RFC 4627 was > obsoleted by RFC 7158 from the tools html version of RFC 4627. This is > desirable from the viewpoint of trying to avoid confusion for the > average visitor, but it may make it slightly more difficult to follow > every minor turn of the "paper trail". It may also be a special case > that may not justify investing additional time. The data used for the Obsoleted by information ultimately comes from the RFC-Editor, and if they say this, I think we'll keep it that way: 4627 The application/json Media Type for JavaScript Object Notation (JSON). D. Crockford. July 2006. (Format: TXT=16319 bytes) (Obsoleted by RFC7158, RFC7159) (Status: INFORMATIONAL) Regards, Henrik From nobody Wed Mar 12 08:38:42 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08BFC1A074B for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:38:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.147 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id syAwaQlRH0EV for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:38:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from egssmtp03.att.com (egssmtp03.att.com [144.160.128.152]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 399B51A085B for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:38:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw1.maillennium.att.com (maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by egssmtp03.att.com ( egs 8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s2CFcOH2023804 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:38:27 -0700 Received: from vpn-135-70-103-184.vpn.swst.att.com ([135.70.103.184]) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with ESMTP id <20140312153824gw100j0c6ge>; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:38:24 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [135.70.103.184] Message-ID: <53207F6F.8060408@att.com> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 11:38:23 -0400 From: Tony Hansen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Henrik Levkowetz , Tools Team Discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/Fch1vReAJIpIY53V2hx7SSodWEw Subject: [Tools-discuss] xml.resource.org is getting wrong cert X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:38:39 -0000 Today when going to xml.resource.org, I'm getting the certificate for *.tools.ietf.org Tony Hansen From nobody Thu Mar 13 01:15:45 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BB581A095A for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 01:15:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uHDFEb2zaDxp for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 01:15:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A47241A0703 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 01:15:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47854 helo=vigonier.tools.ietf.org ident=henrik) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WO0nS-00073W-KA; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 09:15:22 +0100 Message-ID: <5321691A.70002@levkowetz.com> Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 09:15:22 +0100 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tony Hansen , Tools Team Discussion References: <53207F6F.8060408@att.com> In-Reply-To: <53207F6F.8060408@att.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: tony@att.com, tools-discuss@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/sj-CEktKa7MPhufoIOSNfJfIU9c Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] xml.resource.org is getting wrong cert X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 08:15:34 -0000 Hi Tony, On 2014-03-12 16:38 Tony Hansen said the following: > Today when going to xml.resource.org, I'm getting the certificate for > *.tools.ietf.org Yees.. I think that's the only one I have. The only alternative is a self- signed one, I think. Henrik From nobody Thu Mar 13 01:20:59 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE6AE1A0960 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 01:20:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XGwexGpvm9Z2 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 01:20:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx11.netapp.com (mx11.netapp.com [216.240.18.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E25301A0703 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 01:20:54 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,645,1389772800"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="108902950" Received: from vmwexceht05-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.77.35]) by mx11-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 13 Mar 2014 01:20:48 -0700 Received: from SACEXCMBX01-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([169.254.2.211]) by vmwexceht05-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.77.35]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 01:20:48 -0700 From: "Eggert, Lars" To: Henrik Levkowetz Thread-Topic: [Tools-discuss] xml.resource.org is getting wrong cert Thread-Index: AQHPPgk1JD/kAkrAjkqBjzPLM1fXDZrfIggAgAABg4A= Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 08:20:47 +0000 Message-ID: References: <53207F6F.8060408@att.com> <5321691A.70002@levkowetz.com> In-Reply-To: <5321691A.70002@levkowetz.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.122.105.18] Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9F9E6B5B-7B03-47CF-809F-F36CAC965176"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/blXiSKLH8MLeQhvo5UOix7G8VZU Cc: Tony Hansen , Tools Team Discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] xml.resource.org is getting wrong cert X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 08:20:57 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_9F9E6B5B-7B03-47CF-809F-F36CAC965176 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 2014-3-13, at 9:15, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > The only alternative is a self- > signed one, I think. https://startssl.com/ has free certs. Lars --Apple-Mail=_9F9E6B5B-7B03-47CF-809F-F36CAC965176 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQCVAwUBUyFqX9ZcnpRveo1xAQKrLQP+LT7Mkv82CJjh/XQGfKF/nJ2Lh/HIcH8S Xh7LPZd+7mhyhCLSXD0tq9+xeJV6O2Hc1JWzmTBVcEkwsIlwXlkoO8p3wODjshyW OpWQwEHL6w4x8ivHwpS4XJo7HMWIYUm4f3zpvq4wnfCsyXTMQDp0InjH89FeSdPB OHzJbFCZ7Ls= =XzNo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_9F9E6B5B-7B03-47CF-809F-F36CAC965176-- From nobody Fri Mar 28 18:13:50 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E28C11A076A for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:13:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ADmUmCvmIFqk for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:13:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from che.mayfirst.org (che.mayfirst.org [209.234.253.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E8201A073B for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:13:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.13.159] (lair.fifthhorseman.net [108.58.6.98]) by che.mayfirst.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9C2AF984 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 21:13:38 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <53361E3F.7080401@fifthhorseman.net> Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 21:13:35 -0400 From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "tools-discuss@ietf.org" X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6+git0.20140323 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="JnRpVVA1SRjsr5aGBxACJOQG2aAquXXE5" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/0nM7Mlq9hkxHfKM-5D4cWWb4T9E Subject: [Tools-discuss] id-submission workflow e-mails should use https for confirmation link and URL and Htmlized X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 01:13:48 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --JnRpVVA1SRjsr5aGBxACJOQG2aAquXXE5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi there-- it looks like the submission of a new draft via https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/ creates a confirmation e-mail with a link in http://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/status/NNNN/confirm/HASH -- this should probably be https://, not http:// also, the new version notification that arrives after confirmation contains three URLs (URL, Status, Htmlized), all of which could be https, but two of which use http (URL, Htmlized). I don't know where in the workflow these templates are stored, but if they can be changed to use https instead, that would be great. Thanks for doing all the work to get IETF web systems set up with https! I'm sure there will be more of these legacy http:// URLs but i figure we can just clean them up as we find them. Regards, --dkg --JnRpVVA1SRjsr5aGBxACJOQG2aAquXXE5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJTNh4/XxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRFQjk2OTEyODdBN0FEREUzNzU3RDkxMUVB NTI0MDFCMTFCRkRGQTVDAAoJEKUkAbEb/fpcWWAQALAENpneKzYBtnBpLVgjY0v6 t8A2uKcl32aVWrK53g4npCQg7yckS5hCYjT4A9Txxmgjj05Y7PjE2QqS+4KqJmB4 xoCyClxODbrCISjL9IuH61LxBOa9fkXCsG67mlDmpxFkXB4jZ44mnhM2olrt+blU m+a4vcfVh4hilm/xqj9g4MbBfPeloo+CKzQFL5HvfZF7EEHf6oxIJ9nCdTrJ6TJv 26Xql9hvt+sVRPLCoBIrh0FqmsOgbtJy3L7s8Nxxmv8CYwYUqgYKsZSgR5fKN6CA WzQEQYW43DIv2YTJo6Gw3bx84P4AecLe7Mrvn5WIhHpeVtJlRV0jU83N411jCrGy 1OiJrC6qxpCgtqkmv+A9OYdOcpuRJD2v0wQAENPb92OPXIoyfoPX8AudVXjYjQhI rSte8b5VlgBkhllTSUkdLJx1GVQScS7muWcY5Y5i7Ll03XfPSdJzpDaOWeM9Ob2m t49QdmBQNtDOoDnBY6QHddgNDtE3pL9o/4TGIvdQCWfToxVvgPlwlmqtKb/uh20i WfkpwDL9CNT1wQ/l9PKS2fR4aozhgtsGwnCvZrTw0d/U8yKdBuV3PdlTlSBtGdl1 TckIzUACi42u8zLMyULdhSu0Mtjm2JNYAqcuQFCLWrRrg+HH3m9pQzIcC75ocJTZ FHHkcYo7GKiGtFk3ovdw =ZpBc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --JnRpVVA1SRjsr5aGBxACJOQG2aAquXXE5--