From nobody Sat Feb 6 07:25:08 2016 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 4693B1A1A10 for ; Sat, 6 Feb 2016 07:25:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_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 D_uxR0iW37rc for ; Sat, 6 Feb 2016 07:25:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from forward14j.cmail.yandex.net (forward14j.cmail.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:0:1630::b4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66DE31A1A02 for ; Sat, 6 Feb 2016 07:25:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp14.mail.yandex.net (smtp14.mail.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:0:801:1::13]) by forward14j.cmail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 5DEDC20E14 for ; Sat, 6 Feb 2016 18:25:00 +0300 (MSK) Received: from smtp14.mail.yandex.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp14.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 3507A1B602EB for ; Sat, 6 Feb 2016 18:25:00 +0300 (MSK) Received: by smtp14.mail.yandex.net (nwsmtp/Yandex) with ESMTPSA id N9DtUcXNp9-OxDSvwTY; Sat, 6 Feb 2016 18:24:59 +0300 (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client certificate not present) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=corrigendum.ru; s=mail; t=1454772299; bh=wZxs9xUl8vYGQvZEm47UTcWK8tXLmflp/+vnR333qbU=; h=Content-Type:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version: Content-Transfer-Encoding:From:Message-ID:User-Agent; b=EQylefRCopMkS8sEIdImKOM8ljPA/tSgBgle8W4+o8wgDksNvgBX8hp5+Yuait7yY 7LwPAbXauK/M+qc3dKDN3lc1HgbVxAyQzo3jiG6OL9QgSCs9Dl8GRU284pkDcPRo/W JFQRdsCleWvmHNSiAOmjXr9jK8z88k1DhihGdDz4= Authentication-Results: smtp14.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@corrigendum.ru X-Yandex-Suid-Status: 1 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes To: tools-discuss@ietf.org Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2016 18:25:05 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: =?utf-8?B?0KDQvtC80LDQvSDQlNC+0L3Rh9C10L3QutC+?= Message-ID: User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.17 (Win64) Archived-At: Subject: [Tools-discuss] Rfcmarkup-1.116 feedback: truncated tooltip 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, 06 Feb 2016 15:25:06 -0000 Hello, On , hover over the [RFC6946] link. The tooltip says "Processing of IPv6 ". The actual title of RFC 6946 is "Processing of IPv6 "Atomic" Fragments". So it looks like quotes in RFC titles cause the tooltip text to be truncated. Also, the rfcmarkup sources at seem to be outdated. The last version is 1.116, but those sources are for 1.96. Regards, Roman. From nobody Sun Feb 14 02:47:51 2016 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 EB4671B3C91 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2016 02:47:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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 FCqKcqPI9Imt for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2016 02:47:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8073F1B3C8E for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2016 02:47:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.107.33]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LtmK9-1ZoOFf2n93-011EFp for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2016 11:47:42 +0100 To: Tools Team Discussion From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <56C05B4C.1010901@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2016 11:47:40 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:bEmekzi0mBLar/IqX6PkjdFRRVX7zlJe839UgOaVmjaa249IpG/ EZGtGAX3vI5IrGOx4C0unvZqsPPb4CvJ62PSHqscGqse+doj4AU1sONvrcT/FayVQ2Q1C6O oNKVFJ9loaq5GhUw6imFW8w2HxfXOdahBOIYllPrAIzUbjK5QEwqTVQDyLxJm17XjQcp1FC UMbWmF/9nmVRn510gYF6g== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:5EW3CrGEeNA=:PBya5cyOaG9kpFDKQFJgl5 qXiZ/7U9JApNj+7NFgiX0Blm3Kjg80oSyW2o59ATYafpOVyjpJypPxybtnFk2WJdw75zCaXpE iD9VmB3Ti3wUWerOtQ8AbsmADaApikF25/KipmDg78ka9Z9XKCQHWsJFwg/sU1wUXAzQaBlZV 2cXuYrxEwdiUKZO/X6vAoZ5PeTK9hC4h6+q5Y1LUCSMQPECvVrDainJwt/wirXz29/vBGdtSd mwKcX/9lGBu3zUrSnP+XSjCHf9zxFxmgARxSQnng2lIKTkqe/FL2oTk+EAaEqHD4GHJLJNrjp DnCskqveADa7s5VMU8jl2KuV8jsNAfseYy4oUmJdhvKWELQQO4KxjBTTyBhYIIhddEx42+76I NgQyxygI0gl1YzILthTmWU/vFHKKHI02dxP7FFqXyE3HoWX7/SyhabRNh98n/MjA2uBkwRgyL zczj6bbCx+fgIwcpXPmD8vETBPC7aV/HNhIKorMlNDAvimsunjey1zytWkgdMzwuXkbc9tBQ2 KBN7/LQZH/vlmfLpmQVJ8PmZfhHXgwnHTxx50sot1tsIt1m9ZS7YWR6g9vFr7yvCp+Urb7XqY uHMK8QCRsEk3q4m+ZIJ925FG5sbmPzBXHUzERcYjvE3DVXr2VZV6BcjkWWgyzL/r6ucXfre73 XTIN1HBxZdkXNKK4YF8Ahf+SJFo5bCmehVuvcY8ROrhE/e6YvCzFd4XhdYfQM3GiSdA6UkjgM P37137ocCckdLyZ/p41Gf/UMCpZEZSwc9NFSKxei2A33tin+3eoxUXgmJPBLBDAOvhp0qoqeI kemZtws Archived-At: Subject: [Tools-discuss] http://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org down 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: Sun, 14 Feb 2016 10:47:50 -0000 ...seems to be down, and was down around the same time yesterday (connecting to port 80 on 64.170.98.42, but getting no response). Best regards, Julian From nobody Sun Feb 14 05:36:22 2016 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 16B841A8711 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2016 05:36:21 -0800 (PST) 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 Mb6UIcImXP1L for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2016 05:36:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (zinfandel.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 35ACE1A9081 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2016 05:36:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from 81-235-150-134-no105.tbcn.telia.com ([81.235.150.134]:52909 helo=[192.168.1.120]) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.82_1-5b7a7c0-XX) (envelope-from ) id 1aUwqZ-000682-2C; Sun, 14 Feb 2016 05:36:19 -0800 Message-ID: <56C082CC.70803@levkowetz.com> Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2016 14:36:12 +0100 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Reschke , Tools Team Discussion References: <56C05B4C.1010901@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <56C05B4C.1010901@gmx.de> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="oW8VOa1QUMPgoumWU81rnrScf0t7wiAEe" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 81.235.150.134 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: Tools-discuss@ietf.org, julian.reschke@gmx.de X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] http://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org down 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: Sun, 14 Feb 2016 13:36:21 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --oW8VOa1QUMPgoumWU81rnrScf0t7wiAEe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2016-02-14 11:47, Julian Reschke wrote: > ...seems to be down, and was down around the same time yesterday=20 > (connecting to port 80 on 64.170.98.42, but getting no response). Yes, apache went down on one of the machines yesterday, and again today. I haven't figured out what causes it yet, but it's up now, and I'm watching it. Best regards, Henrik --oW8VOa1QUMPgoumWU81rnrScf0t7wiAEe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJWwILMAAoJEE6bV0uPuxcaTvEP/04/tgUJFKEBoMlvrg+GpiuM btmBZ00J9psMgQGWieQNvF9FX/LdEmv4vGCWOaubuPOdeekSDCHBn/HtcmfMfyYd cC1OeJroo7LMmERvB6r/p5qCCJGKJbtvJiZrSMnkwBhu+z3sMQivdwb+T/YK2ZDv haJ0SS14llu9e2l3HjBj9h2iZpFBraAoIFHK1EqI6jRXh3HQC8QckjXu5z10/DmO H6HpJ+u10FifLmXcKNf3hp4FurLMDxU3vSx8C5CgqpZuNmkvxj9LwM05hZkfUWqf v5BO2FYqsjWDI9GBvroZro09bal3YnPMMhul2TX9FP7T1FwwmVV8T4swVOnAHQVo obG+RM0OkjuSMhD0ss5EZchPZtE4OOInJ2DU/DjaliNPyHNRt9Sro5clAg3g08MP W6X9obtI0irXDPfmYf0K30OSYN7XkV3zAgOoQ5+rs4pEcvK9WvuWWSxIUE1sP8BL TzSeqh6XHRgnc++l2hYuS76gU3Mr1aWJh+3zFmr0+K8FGQIX9ANbvfRu34igQna5 mNC9BBF1ntzRRMI1XUH2SE65zbI6ITTcEx3iAIGR5ElX9CKHNyE2cXzdIGjhiZFS PhrHz8vJ2LsVwOearJwaqiFWVqPOjsWrM3asRMbikpQ0E/OzDCW735ZdsYZ2YXSj h8h9aO3nP+ozjnnJyWjO =M1FW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --oW8VOa1QUMPgoumWU81rnrScf0t7wiAEe-- From nobody Tue Feb 16 03:41:42 2016 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 5DEA91A1BDA; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 03:41:39 -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 2atVpWdmCIiR; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 03:41:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pf0-x229.google.com (mail-pf0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA4F31A0264; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 03:41:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pf0-x229.google.com with SMTP id x65so103999983pfb.1; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 03:41:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3BcXBAMo2bcyw98meDYqQPMdEEyFytEy/j9ImUuqk/g=; b=B3i8EvUjuEgaZUIeX4w4jgpWObZoYrImnVHRVFdxc2U2V403l7P7tCCxUejtFCzIUG jrkoeunVLNfcDSTr6ya7oCI3ueGUuse3Ek6cF9PJDM+zWpp0umKzQSnddLkruZPvInOZ p8cP1fHfRM/I0AwKQnMbuzTJncz10dvXfJTr3TX28nXj8Ww+WEGTApNYpt7keBau/52f gGN6iSuj6cATn204iXaDpVEUy0M4b3KqWTUhWvJVhVMv2hx9/sjMfxjfVwS9E1fJhV0r 6dpHluh01SqBfAWKYifoJR/u4sbSyKbvXyX5csuPzfCsb6AOXY6JhERor31yYH9VuKZb 0PiA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=3BcXBAMo2bcyw98meDYqQPMdEEyFytEy/j9ImUuqk/g=; b=hHmFmiVmwdIwnrMUvd/h5WNXHoKkD0yD3RL8Sa8Ro4Wfc58L2nXTeTl+f+1gX3id1I KVb34ZWBD7iZyzUC3AJAKeAMTQGPWixLOmsu2tf0gKunmdVlrFFEl9JXEFl0Ev/Zdhn3 yORmzqwp7nGfIWYzAI1GvpCBcXsUwsjbEZ43YDjtapjAQuvKHuf9iSWSzl2EjE7bFFrO PP4AKKriqCEgQi5Gn4VdL6BY7Mh5HdrUbnUUzXYQcUJ/MTWgHW8ptH5WK03NfG2IBE81 dZbqDufboW7PdZKdvEuM/RPqxhcsqLhuRbV6CdZa01l+Cy+641gs7Q4yEdlbyJetKE+T ZvDA== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOSAK98Pn7lZfkajAJq/XTz6nuPHuyG5xm5gZCSUor22Tq/VPt93qWi5E4Mj4mp5PA== X-Received: by 10.98.14.146 with SMTP id 18mr30193744pfo.35.1455622897656; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 03:41:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [172.18.133.40] (cowboy.intuit.com. [65.204.229.11]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x88sm45226478pfi.66.2016.02.16.03.41.33 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 16 Feb 2016 03:41:36 -0800 (PST) To: Carsten Bormann References: <54AB22DD-ADF8-4E2D-ADB6-345A16A2FDA2@mnot.net> <56C304BB.5050802@gmail.com> <56C3083E.7030801@tzi.org> From: Yaron Sheffer Message-ID: <56C30AEB.5010106@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 13:41:31 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56C3083E.7030801@tzi.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: "captive-portals@ietf.org" , Mark Nottingham , tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] [Captive-portals] CAPPORT meeting at IETF95 in Buenos Aires. 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, 16 Feb 2016 11:41:39 -0000 I agree about removing (or not including) the asterisks. Adding the tools team. Thanks, Yaron On 02/16/2016 01:30 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote: > Actually, the markdown-to-RFCXML tool works fine (as you can see in the > HTML generated from this: https://mnot.github.io/I-D/capport-problem/), > it's just that TXT doesn't have bold, so XML2RFC marks the bold text > asterisks :-) [I happen to think that this is a distraction that needs > to be switched off in XML2RFC.] > > Grüße, Carsten > > > Yaron Sheffer wrote: >> Your markdown-to-RFC tool misses out on asterisks that are being used >> for bold text, and remain in the TXT version (Sec. 3). From nobody Tue Feb 16 06:29:48 2016 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 2EA861A8966 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 06:29:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 GfXIkunt4al9 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 06:29:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay3-d.mail.gandi.net (relay3-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 722D91A8961 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 06:29:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from mfilter46-d.gandi.net (mfilter46-d.gandi.net [217.70.178.177]) by relay3-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7DDAA80DD; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:29:43 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mfilter46-d.gandi.net Received: from relay3-d.mail.gandi.net ([IPv6:::ffff:217.70.183.195]) by mfilter46-d.gandi.net (mfilter46-d.gandi.net [::ffff:10.0.15.180]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TmnK5qACP-Le; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:29:42 +0100 (CET) X-Originating-IP: 93.199.254.229 Received: from nar.local (p5DC7FEE5.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.254.229]) (Authenticated sender: cabo@cabo.im) by relay3-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8015CA80CB; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:29:41 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <56C33253.5010405@tzi.org> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:29:39 +0100 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.8 (Macintosh/20151105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yaron Sheffer References: <54AB22DD-ADF8-4E2D-ADB6-345A16A2FDA2@mnot.net> <56C304BB.5050802@gmail.com> <56C3083E.7030801@tzi.org> <56C30AEB.5010106@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <56C30AEB.5010106@gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: Mark Nottingham , tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] [Captive-portals] CAPPORT meeting at IETF95 in Buenos Aires. 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, 16 Feb 2016 14:29:47 -0000 (As an expedient, I'd just do a XSLT one-liner to build a for-text version of the XML without the spanx tags -- which I would include here, but my XSLT is a bit rusty.) Grüße, Carsten Yaron Sheffer wrote: > I agree about removing (or not including) the asterisks. Adding the > tools team. > > Thanks, > Yaron > > On 02/16/2016 01:30 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote: >> Actually, the markdown-to-RFCXML tool works fine (as you can see in the >> HTML generated from this: https://mnot.github.io/I-D/capport-problem/), >> it's just that TXT doesn't have bold, so XML2RFC marks the bold text >> asterisks :-) [I happen to think that this is a distraction that needs >> to be switched off in XML2RFC.] >> >> Grüße, Carsten >> >> >> Yaron Sheffer wrote: >>> Your markdown-to-RFC tool misses out on asterisks that are being used >>> for bold text, and remain in the TXT version (Sec. 3). > From nobody Tue Feb 16 08:14:53 2016 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 BB2291ACCC7 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 06:55:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.657 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.657 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006, SPF_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 yUCyS7zHQd9Q for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 06:55:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (mail.greenbytes.de [217.91.35.233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB29A1AC3B3 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 06:55:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.greenbytes.de (Postfix, from userid 117) id E0C8415A00B0; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:55:37 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=greenbytes.de; s=mail; t=1455634537; bh=ZnDYqe7ynWhLgWnTiLnAY6D1kgyzN3JMuZbwC9W8ddE=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=U6XB4BwknvVj7GEgVMjTTBYc2mvATBgcyaraBV/uSK6K8PUl3NWANgSIGnTeCzE1I pqS8jpfkPPEiIMxyjqMImtMUFb+s1aY2fmVe52mAWbwFfSKUh51/oDEgyZQZXVNCgh KdXRIVcGHvzdTcgLtf0m6w+waF30oYZm0UILTcbI= Received: from [192.168.1.123] (unknown [217.91.35.233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.greenbytes.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7D92B15A00B0; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:55:37 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=greenbytes.de; s=mail; t=1455634537; bh=ZnDYqe7ynWhLgWnTiLnAY6D1kgyzN3JMuZbwC9W8ddE=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=U6XB4BwknvVj7GEgVMjTTBYc2mvATBgcyaraBV/uSK6K8PUl3NWANgSIGnTeCzE1I pqS8jpfkPPEiIMxyjqMImtMUFb+s1aY2fmVe52mAWbwFfSKUh51/oDEgyZQZXVNCgh KdXRIVcGHvzdTcgLtf0m6w+waF30oYZm0UILTcbI= To: Carsten Bormann , Yaron Sheffer References: <54AB22DD-ADF8-4E2D-ADB6-345A16A2FDA2@mnot.net> <56C304BB.5050802@gmail.com> <56C3083E.7030801@tzi.org> <56C30AEB.5010106@gmail.com> <56C33253.5010405@tzi.org> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <56C33869.5040006@greenbytes.de> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:55:37 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56C33253.5010405@tzi.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 08:14:50 -0800 Cc: Mark Nottingham , tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] [Captive-portals] CAPPORT meeting at IETF95 in Buenos Aires. 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, 16 Feb 2016 14:55:41 -0000 On 2016-02-16 15:29, Carsten Bormann wrote: > (As an expedient, I'd just do a XSLT one-liner to build a for-text > version of the XML without the spanx tags -- which I would include here, > but my XSLT is a bit rusty.) > > Grüße, Carsten Something like this should work: > version="1.0" >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From nobody Mon Feb 29 17:12:40 2016 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 3EF761A8738 for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 17:12:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.277 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=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 KR_vXAdcg9OP for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 17:12:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yw0-x22f.google.com (mail-yw0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B700E1A8797 for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 17:11:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yw0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id u200so136994749ywf.0 for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 17:11:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=fFB4v+szd+hZkYzx4P992vO7s146RM09PKoH6dX6dik=; b=DonDqA/jeTVNEEFRez8jcOAO9ZRGuxF4D9iehz7yWdBlHU7OCka/ff4CzIOXHTfuDU K9bo8fTSODD/JLBqXN5ARDuwf0ICgCZ0BLLhBAKEyoPTVgAPWVhc/QGLJEqZWtjvLBoL sZifWvOIqQ99bYQB4E1+5VK/zb07szQd8J4JaNP8Sdv415k//Z/qq6v1RtTv0xNLMmoG 4TqrhCsBX8lJieIfSGPLXmgnNs8PKNfi3+SlLP7oMQeHGrKzOg0KohRaA6Wt85DIHfE6 QXINiWyQjxNH3tdIAdWrpbWjr59/XsFIytCmsGehSDS7EY3XP3iaUhRO32zdJ094PIg0 WJBA== 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; bh=fFB4v+szd+hZkYzx4P992vO7s146RM09PKoH6dX6dik=; b=ltOrdsqOTTOocSiqwGkhlhXuvZausCF8y69Ns+1V2AoNifBwsde5i6Y7PdQbxOlpai 8JkpmxSYAbWtwMK4UNbvNK/CWTEKvrY0NLPdrRV5rw58zzRSlaNURpmXuWpNAdSaEGJ1 JhE+NZ4TRN2q5DUS1061Iv9wxe+9+hCy72KTRtp+M5OCa4QCUkYxWwWVMtWogNmQiTV/ MqV3trGctFBVjRDMq6pYyxs2XIgFgx5QqlqQL8VgUp8W+mgvyBmyGXrqIfjTCys+Mi1w ehXYLrZUoxEhAs8Ig7QOVLmNftph6OE8d38klywwS07bJn6Tar6O0nSPyYWUwehVEWlE lZog== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJuBoCR9n5etEzA8/vUf/JWHfxzUcrEIbQ2/5fUQWbMeCNEDFUY5SgHLw1WUaZcKQOm3bZ+JBkwex0Hjw== X-Received: by 10.129.46.15 with SMTP id u15mr9882669ywu.129.1456794717948; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 17:11:57 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.13.249.5 with HTTP; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 17:11:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5648BF26.2060206@levkowetz.com> References: <5648B478.7050000@levkowetz.com> <5648BF26.2060206@levkowetz.com> From: Eric Rescorla Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 17:11:18 -0800 Message-ID: To: Henrik Levkowetz Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11414df0acbf70052cf2737c Archived-At: Cc: tools-discuss Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Performance problems retrieving drafts 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, 01 Mar 2016 01:12:36 -0000 --001a11414df0acbf70052cf2737c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Did this ever get fixed? I am still seeing like 1.5 second delays for draft fetches? -Ekr On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On 2015-11-15 17:43, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Henrik Levkowetz > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Eric, > >> > >> Actually, it's a very simple-minded throttling, in defence of aggressive > >> robots: sleep for 5 seconds. > >> > > > > That seems... suboptimal. > > > > > > I've rearranged the code a bit, to reduce the wait if the html file > doesn't > >> need to be re-generated. > >> > > > > Hmm... Doesn't seem to be fixed yet. > > It needs to propagate to all the servers; I normally only spend time fixing > it on one, and let it propagate in its own good time. If you wish, you > can hit https://zinfandel.tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-acme-acme > directly. > > Henrik > > > (When you see an issue with anything on tools.ietf.org, please email me, > >> rather > >> than the anonymous 'folks'; they can't do anything about it. If I > happen > >> to > >> notice messages on the list, I fix things; but I don't always see list > >> messages > >> in a timely manner.) > >> > > > > OK. > > > > -Ekr > > > > > >> Regards, > >> > >> Henrik > >> > >> On 2015-11-15 17:04, Eric Rescorla wrote: > >> > Hi folks, > >> > > >> > tools.ietf.org has a major performance problem whenever you fetch a > >> > draft without a version number. So, for instance, dereference: > >> > > >> > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-acme-acme > >> > > >> > This does a 302 redirect to: > >> > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-acme-acme-01 > >> > > >> > The second fetch is not too terrible (250ms or so), but the first > fetch > >> > spends > >> > 6 seconds waiting for the site to do the redirect. A bit of digging > shows > >> > that > >> > essentially all this time is spent after the request is sent and > waiting > >> > for the > >> > site. Based on inferences from other behaviors, I suspect that this is > >> some > >> > sort of database query to see what the latest draft version is. Given > the > >> > trivial size of this data set, that seems like it should be easy to > fix, > >> > though... > >> > > >> > -Ekr > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > --001a11414df0acbf70052cf2737c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Did this ever get fixed? I am still seeing like 1.5 second= delays for draft fetches?

-Ekr


On Sun, Nov 15,= 2015 at 9:21 AM, Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>= wrote:
Hi Eric,

On 2015-11-15 17:43, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> Actually, it's a very simple-minded throttling, in defence of = aggressive
>> robots: sleep for 5 seconds.
>>
>
> That seems... suboptimal.
>
>
> I've rearranged the code a bit, to reduce the wait if the html fil= e doesn't
>> need to be re-generated.
>>
>
> Hmm... Doesn't seem to be fixed yet.

It needs to propagate to all the servers; I normally only spend time= fixing
it on one, and let it propagate in its own good time.=C2=A0 If you wish, yo= u
can hit https://zinfandel.tools.ietf.org/h= tml/draft-ietf-acme-acme directly.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Henrik

> (When you see an issue with anything on tools.ietf.org, please email m= e,
>> rather
>> than the anonymous 'folks'; they can't do anything abo= ut it.=C2=A0 If I happen
>> to
>> notice messages on the list, I fix things; but I don't always = see list
>> messages
>> in a timely manner.)
>>
>
> OK.
>
> -Ekr
>
>
>> Regards,
>>
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Henrik
>>
>> On 2015-11-15 17:04, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>> > Hi folks,
>> >
>> > tools.ietf.org has a major performance problem whenever you= fetch a
>> > draft without a version number. So, for instance, dereference= :
>> >
>> >=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://tools.ietf.org/htm= l/draft-ietf-acme-acme
>> >
>> > This does a 302 redirect to:
>> >=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://tools.ietf.org/= html/draft-ietf-acme-acme-01
>> >
>> > The second fetch is not too terrible (250ms or so), but the f= irst fetch
>> > spends
>> > 6 seconds waiting for the site to do the redirect. A bit of d= igging shows
>> > that
>> > essentially all this time is spent after the request is sent = and waiting
>> > for the
>> > site. Based on inferences from other behaviors, I suspect tha= t this is
>> some
>> > sort of database query to see what the latest draft version i= s. Given the
>> > trivial size of this data set, that seems like it should be e= asy to fix,
>> > though...
>> >
>> > -Ekr
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>


--001a11414df0acbf70052cf2737c--