From fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk Thu Nov 1 04:10:58 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F5D121F84EC for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 04:10:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.74 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.74 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.74, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2cojj760MqKw for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 04:10:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ppsw-41.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-41.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 831A321F84D9 for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 04:10:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Received: from hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.51]:40508) by ppsw-41.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.156]:25) with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:fanf2) id 1TTsfn-0002ly-Sr (Exim 4.72) (return-path ); Thu, 01 Nov 2012 11:10:56 +0000 Received: from fanf2 by hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk) with local id 1TTsfn-00016r-SO (Exim 4.72) (return-path ); Thu, 01 Nov 2012 11:10:55 +0000 Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 11:10:55 +0000 From: Tony Finch X-X-Sender: fanf2@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk To: tools-discuss@ietf.org Message-ID: User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LSU 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: Tony Finch X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 12:39:58 -0700 Cc: dot@dotat.at Subject: [Tools-discuss] which drafts should appear on working group pages? X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 11:10:58 -0000 What are the criteria for including drafts on a working group's tools page? I ask because draft-koch-dnsop-dnssec-operator-change is not listed on http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dnsop/ Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch http://dotat.at/ Forties, Cromarty: East, veering southeast, 4 or 5, occasionally 6 at first. Rough, becoming slight or moderate. Showers, rain at first. Moderate or good, occasionally poor at first. From henrik@levkowetz.com Sun Nov 4 11:52:43 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8044721F8785 for ; Sun, 4 Nov 2012 11:52:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AeDN5i6wFhaW for ; Sun, 4 Nov 2012 11:52:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from merlot.tools.ietf.org (merlot.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:0:31::14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E838E21F879B for ; Sun, 4 Nov 2012 11:52:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-476e.meeting.ietf.org ([130.129.71.110]:60535) by merlot.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TV6Ek-0002ja-70; Sun, 04 Nov 2012 20:52:04 +0100 Message-ID: <5096C763.9070602@levkowetz.com> Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2012 14:52:03 -0500 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:10.0.10) Gecko/20121024 Thunderbird/10.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tony Finch References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 130.129.71.110 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: dot@dotat.at, tools-discuss@ietf.org, henrik-sent@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:57:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on merlot.tools.ietf.org) Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] which drafts should appear on working group pages? X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2012 19:52:43 -0000 Hi Tony, On 2012-11-01 07:10 Tony Finch said the following: > What are the criteria for including drafts on a working group's tools > page? > > I ask because draft-koch-dnsop-dnssec-operator-change is not listed on > http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dnsop/ The draft is expired. Only active drafts (and possibly expired drafts which have been replaced by a WG draft) are listed under 'Related Active Documents). Best regards, Henrik From fred@cisco.com Mon Nov 5 09:08:20 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B884021F87C9 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:08:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.583 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.583 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.016, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tWpG9UFscQ-t for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:08:20 -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 123BA21F879E for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:08:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1073; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1352135300; x=1353344900; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=qzlOnQxLf9SMp3GUZiLYUpGCWA8ewXr9ArkPB1o4k78=; b=J3WftcRNppeL6JEvLn+1A/6ytakUcxho+Y1LvzKtHD38AMPIQoad6lbE 7pPvRP/oh69GZbcg5MqAdMF7xo+D7f9aLlTYALIlaVND91+/lr4oTt5Wq adgB0p0tAQbLJVL2FdA7jHK0AxXq7NvZ3OYStqRNOfhUC6zIE/lKHxxSN U=; X-Files: signature.asc : 195 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAC7xl1CtJXG+/2dsb2JhbABEwzCBCIIgAQQSAXgBKlYnBBsGFIdomXWBK594kVxhA457gSGUOIFrgm+CGQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,715,1344211200"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="138959554" Received: from rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com ([173.37.113.190]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Nov 2012 17:08:18 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x08.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x08.cisco.com [173.37.183.82]) by rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qA5H8IRi020953 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 17:08:18 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.68]) by xhc-rcd-x08.cisco.com ([173.37.183.82]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 11:08:18 -0600 From: "Fred Baker (fred)" To: "tools-discuss@ietf.org Discussion" Thread-Topic: Comment on new meeting materials manager Thread-Index: AQHNu3gmP1rcJrPjUkmf3ZGULJHQkg== Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 17:08:17 +0000 Message-ID: <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B196887@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.82.242.241] x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.000.1014-19340.004 x-tm-as-result: No--24.095500-8.000000-31 x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_CA6EC170-65C1-4A42-99EA-070D6F679FF4"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [Tools-discuss] Comment on new meeting materials manager X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 17:08:20 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_CA6EC170-65C1-4A42-99EA-070D6F679FF4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii (a) I like it.=20 (b) I do notice one glitch with the "drag" function. This is that I = cannot move a presentation to the first or last positions; I can move it = between any two, but not "before the first" and not "after the last". = What I am doing right now is moving things to the second or = second-to-last position, and then move the first/last to achieve the = intended result.= --Apple-Mail=_CA6EC170-65C1-4A42-99EA-070D6F679FF4 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----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin) iD8DBQFQl/KAbjEdbHIsm0MRAo5JAJ0c+KF4h+2mrGQv0jt+6d3kCF5WvwCgzPdk /DbmSIUK1LjNJ8HDgFPQ3yk= =oFw2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_CA6EC170-65C1-4A42-99EA-070D6F679FF4-- From bob.hinden@gmail.com Mon Nov 5 09:14:28 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 677ED21F87AA for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:14:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.459 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.459 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.140, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PdUB+0QxTlft for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:14:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-bk0-f44.google.com (mail-bk0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07D3721F8783 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:14:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-bk0-f44.google.com with SMTP id jc3so2179567bkc.31 for ; Mon, 05 Nov 2012 09:14:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=OPiUHAQDhVT6qfERiT/O8CSFox7ZjqSifimIJG00n7g=; b=eu2yRokuLoITBQQwUit2wamj+beCfX8K6+DmfATpR07WHxOu9LXPNjFvMI6WGAYME7 xbUar7cnzZDViyiH0eBLJ2oKyp8YrhzHJks53rJctImlXjrj8h+EBplz11cXp7o5vDMP FziJ52qe0b9Y6OK3hiINArJgkCHl63m2giigBgl5GfKweZZu9du5kN4Ms13QhAQe2//P SBQ91ObyJUkuGqLHQAD9HVAOWvGxIrUw/XoiIJgc50ACYNTIXnC8qRBEdy252IJ0veSf sXdw0wO16hC4vmfmQv3fxAm3JkEcgbRwUd5OO0MfAXK2GSufkrrDZ+Fcyphj0pHZmn4t FFhw== Received: by 10.204.11.79 with SMTP id s15mr2527782bks.136.1352135665959; Mon, 05 Nov 2012 09:14:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:df8::16:9d56:dbfa:9524:d211? ([2001:df8:0:16:9d56:dbfa:9524:d211]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gy18sm10376547bkc.4.2012.11.05.09.14.23 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 05 Nov 2012 09:14:25 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Bob Hinden In-Reply-To: <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B196887@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com> Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 12:14:21 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0F703724-B958-464D-AE20-D651EB035ADE@gmail.com> References: <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B196887@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com> To: Fred Baker (fred) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) Cc: Alexa Morris , "tools-discuss@ietf.org Discussion" Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Comment on new meeting materials manager X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 17:14:28 -0000 Fred, On Nov 5, 2012, at 12:08 PM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote: > (a) I like it.=20 >=20 > (b) I do notice one glitch with the "drag" function. This is that I = cannot move a presentation to the first or last positions; I can move it = between any two, but not "before the first" and not "after the last". = What I am doing right now is moving things to the second or = second-to-last position, and then move the first/last to achieve the = intended result. I saw that too. Bob From amorris@amsl.com Mon Nov 5 09:18:39 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C8F221F84B9 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:18:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g1BGwFslyztf for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:18:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.amsl.com (mail.amsl.com [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 954C721F849F for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:18:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A80BB124601; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:18:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DEffPtEa5umu; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:18:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-603b.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-603b.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.96.59]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3DDF81245FE; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:18:37 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Alexa Morris In-Reply-To: <0F703724-B958-464D-AE20-D651EB035ADE@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:18:36 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <609B85CB-7988-4BC8-8BA6-43FDCFD827DF@amsl.com> References: <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B196887@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com> <0F703724-B958-464D-AE20-D651EB035ADE@gmail.com> To: Bob Hinden X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Cc: "Fred Baker \(fred\)" , "tools-discuss@ietf.org Discussion" Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Comment on new meeting materials manager X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 17:18:39 -0000 That's good feedback and I'm copying Ryan so that he can look into this = when he has time. Alexa On Nov 5, 2012, at 9:14 AM, Bob Hinden wrote: > Fred, >=20 > On Nov 5, 2012, at 12:08 PM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote: >=20 >> (a) I like it.=20 >>=20 >> (b) I do notice one glitch with the "drag" function. This is that I = cannot move a presentation to the first or last positions; I can move it = between any two, but not "before the first" and not "after the last". = What I am doing right now is moving things to the second or = second-to-last position, and then move the first/last to achieve the = intended result. >=20 > I saw that too. >=20 > Bob >=20 >=20 >=20 ---------- Alexa Morris / Executive Director / IETF 48377 Fremont Blvd., Suite 117, Fremont, CA 94538 Phone: +1.510.492.4089 / Fax: +1.510.492.4001 Email: amorris@amsl.com Managed by Association Management Solutions (AMS) Forum Management, Meeting and Event Planning www.amsl.com From rcross@amsl.com Mon Nov 5 11:13:36 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28E6E21F8D6F for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 11:13:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x2jI6M3NOd4m for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 11:13:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.amsl.com (mail.amsl.com [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 118E921F8995 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 11:13:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6278C12466F; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 11:13:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xbb_Ol5I1ueY; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 11:13:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-44d4.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-44d4.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.68.212]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D380412466E; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 11:13:22 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ryan Cross In-Reply-To: <609B85CB-7988-4BC8-8BA6-43FDCFD827DF@amsl.com> Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 14:13:20 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5E54BF68-E522-4659-8099-933700C83622@amsl.com> References: <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B196887@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com> <0F703724-B958-464D-AE20-D651EB035ADE@gmail.com> <609B85CB-7988-4BC8-8BA6-43FDCFD827DF@amsl.com> To: Alexa Morris X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Cc: "Fred Baker \(fred\)" , "tools-discuss@ietf.org Discussion" Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Comment on new meeting materials manager X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 19:13:36 -0000 I noticed this too and discovered that you can achieve the desired = results by being precise when "grabbing" the item to be re-ordered. = Clicking on the upper portion of the row when dragging to the top and = the lower portion of the row when dragging to the bottom. Alternatively, I can remove the constraints on the draggable area. Then = you can drag the item beyond the list area (ie, above it) and it will = snap into first place. I felt this behavior was visually inconsistent = though, when a slide item is dragged into adjacent areas of the page. Ryan On Nov 5, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Alexa Morris wrote: > That's good feedback and I'm copying Ryan so that he can look into = this when he has time. >=20 > Alexa >=20 >=20 > On Nov 5, 2012, at 9:14 AM, Bob Hinden wrote: >=20 >> Fred, >>=20 >> On Nov 5, 2012, at 12:08 PM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote: >>=20 >>> (a) I like it.=20 >>>=20 >>> (b) I do notice one glitch with the "drag" function. This is that I = cannot move a presentation to the first or last positions; I can move it = between any two, but not "before the first" and not "after the last". = What I am doing right now is moving things to the second or = second-to-last position, and then move the first/last to achieve the = intended result. >>=20 >> I saw that too. >>=20 >> Bob >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > ---------- > Alexa Morris / Executive Director / IETF > 48377 Fremont Blvd., Suite 117, Fremont, CA 94538 > Phone: +1.510.492.4089 / Fax: +1.510.492.4001 > Email: amorris@amsl.com >=20 > Managed by Association Management Solutions (AMS) > Forum Management, Meeting and Event Planning > www.amsl.com >=20 From fred@cisco.com Mon Nov 5 15:24:33 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42A6521F86DE for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 15:24:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.586 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.586 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.013, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rD+Vzne6E7ZN for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 15:24:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71FFC21F86D3 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 15:24:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2593; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1352157872; x=1353367472; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=5kdLY10XN3+enPv31Jr99BRRuSQO+nwHyp7bkoEFUAA=; b=N/DIGHawAjC0rgIAbuaARDyGTwZlRUpbkc3o2aYJKEYpDzs07QBLSCfT WnoF3zDO6Gz7CvCWBV3AFH4Y6bURh6EEw9KR6ioXy+YqEo8HKxijMP08b GrFw6iGFy8bFJZZBdceBRX580Pi/QhE5M4tpK9pL1ScKp8j3oZ1I1xwg/ k=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EADtKmFCtJV2Y/2dsb2JhbABBA8MzgQiCHgEBAQMBEgE2MAUJAgIBCAcHCgokGxclAgQOBQgTB4diBpsMoBYEi32DElCBeWEDkkmSC4FrgmINgWQ1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,718,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="139080981" Received: from rcdn-core-1.cisco.com ([173.37.93.152]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Nov 2012 23:24:32 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x09.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x09.cisco.com [173.37.183.83]) by rcdn-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qA5NOV4k007650 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 5 Nov 2012 23:24:31 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.68]) by xhc-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([173.37.183.83]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 17:24:31 -0600 From: "Fred Baker (fred)" To: Ryan Cross Thread-Topic: [Tools-discuss] Comment on new meeting materials manager Thread-Index: AQHNu3gmP1rcJrPjUkmf3ZGULJHQkpfb36KAgAABMACAACAOAIAARiyA Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 23:24:30 +0000 Message-ID: <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B19701D@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com> References: <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B196887@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com> <0F703724-B958-464D-AE20-D651EB035ADE@gmail.com> <609B85CB-7988-4BC8-8BA6-43FDCFD827DF@amsl.com> <5E54BF68-E522-4659-8099-933700C83622@amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <5E54BF68-E522-4659-8099-933700C83622@amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.82.254.44] x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.000.1014-19340.004 x-tm-as-result: No--48.147900-8.000000-31 x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-ID: <94182E52F25A874DA738F1B2EDDED8DA@cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Alexa Morris , "tools-discuss@ietf.org Discussion" Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Comment on new meeting materials manager X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 23:24:33 -0000 On Nov 5, 2012, at 2:13 PM, Ryan Cross wrote: > I noticed this too and discovered that you can achieve the desired result= s by being precise when "grabbing" the item to be re-ordered. Clicking on = the upper portion of the row when dragging to the top and the lower portion= of the row when dragging to the bottom. I don't think my description of that would include the word "intuitive" :-) > Alternatively, I can remove the constraints on the draggable area. Then = you can drag the item beyond the list area (ie, above it) and it will snap = into first place. I felt this behavior was visually inconsistent though, w= hen a slide item is dragged into adjacent areas of the page. That might make sense. Make it extend beyond the actual list by a length ro= ughly equal to the width of a line, and you should be OK. It's more consist= ent than having to do a completely different action (move to second-to-last= and then move the last) in the special case=85 Consider this. Imagine that you have a meeting with two presentations, and = you need to invert their order. Yes, you could use the arrows. But imagine = you're used to drag-and-drop and not thinking about that. You can't change = their order by drag-and-drop. > Ryan >=20 > On Nov 5, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Alexa Morris wrote: >=20 >> That's good feedback and I'm copying Ryan so that he can look into this = when he has time. >>=20 >> Alexa >>=20 >>=20 >> On Nov 5, 2012, at 9:14 AM, Bob Hinden wrote: >>=20 >>> Fred, >>>=20 >>> On Nov 5, 2012, at 12:08 PM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote: >>>=20 >>>> (a) I like it.=20 >>>>=20 >>>> (b) I do notice one glitch with the "drag" function. This is that I ca= nnot move a presentation to the first or last positions; I can move it betw= een any two, but not "before the first" and not "after the last". What I am= doing right now is moving things to the second or second-to-last position,= and then move the first/last to achieve the intended result. >>>=20 >>> I saw that too. >>>=20 >>> Bob >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >> ---------- >> Alexa Morris / Executive Director / IETF >> 48377 Fremont Blvd., Suite 117, Fremont, CA 94538 >> Phone: +1.510.492.4089 / Fax: +1.510.492.4001 >> Email: amorris@amsl.com >>=20 >> Managed by Association Management Solutions (AMS) >> Forum Management, Meeting and Event Planning >> www.amsl.com >>=20 >=20 ---------------------------------------------------- The ignorance of how to use new knowledge stockpiles exponentially.=20 - Marshall McLuhan From marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca Tue Nov 6 06:37:44 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D6F021F85D7 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 06:37:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q+Uz+T6WubCc for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 06:37:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E311021F8689 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 06:37:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from [IPv6:2001:df8::80:a078:744c:328e:1c67] (unknown [IPv6:2001:df8:0:80:a078:744c:328e:1c67]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 766D0400D5 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 09:37:43 -0500 (EST) From: Marc Blanchet Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 09:37:42 -0500 Message-Id: To: Tools discussion Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) Subject: [Tools-discuss] material manager X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 14:37:44 -0000 small UI comment: if one want to replace slides, there is a "replace" link aside from the = slides. =20 if one want to replace minutes, one does not know what to do, since = only "delete" is available. So I re-upload the new minutes and they got = replaced. for consistency, would probably be good to have a "replace" link for = minutes and agenda. (but I can survive with the current UI). Marc. From matt@internet2.edu Tue Nov 6 11:07:01 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5780821F86B3 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:06:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z3q4qn9VweSR for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:06:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from int-proxy02.merit.edu (int-proxy02.merit.edu [207.75.116.231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B02321F84E0 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:06:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by int-proxy02.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 901DE1205A6 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 14:06:53 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at int-proxy02.merit.edu Received: from int-proxy02.merit.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (int-proxy02.merit.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id crNW4ND22fFo for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 14:06:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from matt.home (pool-173-68-195-35.nycmny.fios.verizon.net [173.68.195.35]) by int-proxy02.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 934491205A5 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 14:06:51 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <50995FCA.7040700@internet2.edu> Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 14:06:50 -0500 From: Matthew J Zekauskas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-discuss@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-discuss] Link from tools agenda to meeting materials needs to be updated X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 19:07:01 -0000 The tools agenda links to the meeting materials with the reference #wg-. However, it looks like the anchors have changed, and are now of the form "session.group-". For example, for IPPM, this goes from to --Matt From henrik@levkowetz.com Tue Nov 6 11:46:39 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A48CE21F8A5C for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:46:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7G1vBRRIHVTD for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:46:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from merlot.tools.ietf.org (merlot.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:0:31::14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F4621F8A4D for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:46:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-6054.meeting.ietf.org ([130.129.96.84]:56111) by merlot.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TVp5M-0005Lg-4d; Tue, 06 Nov 2012 20:45:24 +0100 Message-ID: <509968D0.6030708@levkowetz.com> Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 14:45:20 -0500 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:10.0.10) Gecko/20121024 Thunderbird/10.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthew J Zekauskas References: <50995FCA.7040700@internet2.edu> In-Reply-To: <50995FCA.7040700@internet2.edu> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 130.129.96.84 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: matt@internet2.edu, tools-discuss@ietf.org, henrik-sent@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:57:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on merlot.tools.ietf.org) Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Link from tools agenda to meeting materials needs to be updated X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 19:46:39 -0000 Hi Matt, On 2012-11-06 14:06 Matthew J Zekauskas said the following: > The tools agenda links to the meeting > materials with the reference #wg-. However, it looks > like the anchors have changed, and are now of the form > "session.group-". For example, for IPPM, this goes from > > to > Ah. Right. Should be fixed now. Thanks for the alert! Best regards, Henrik From marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca Tue Nov 6 15:03:07 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EDFA21F8BBC for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 15:03:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.489 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.489 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.110, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t6f8CJ6+5TPY for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 15:03:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D5921F8BAF for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 15:03:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-5059.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-5059.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.80.89]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EBB92414AD for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 18:03:05 -0500 (EST) From: Marc Blanchet Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 18:03:03 -0500 Message-Id: To: Tools discussion Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) Subject: [Tools-discuss] agenda page going to wg charter X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 23:03:07 -0000 A) =46rom agenda (https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/85/agenda.html), = I click on the wg and arrive to the wg charter such as: = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-sunset4/ in that case, I only see the charter, nothing else about the working = group. B) =46rom the wg page (http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/), I click on the = wg and arrive to the wg infos (http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/sunset4/), = such as documents, charter, list archive, tools wg page, =85 I would suggest that we change the agenda to point to the wg info = (http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/) which is much more useful and includes = the charter. Regards, Marc. From gilger@itsec.rwth-aachen.de Wed Nov 7 00:03:03 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3F5521F8B02 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 00:03:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DHqFm+EOFtgB for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 00:03:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from avalon.gnuzifer.de (avalon.gnuzifer.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:121:43c1::a2:1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DF0321F8B01 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 00:03:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [137.226.161.159] (port=47205 helo=localhost) by avalon.gnuzifer.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TW0bE-0001uS-SR for tools-discuss@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Nov 2012 09:03:00 +0100 Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 09:03:54 +0100 From: Johannes Gilger To: tools-discuss@ietf.org Message-ID: <20121107080354.GA23458@blackbox> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 137.226.161.159 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gilger@itsec.rwth-aachen.de X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 06:08:22 -0800 Subject: [Tools-discuss] tools sorting order broken (?) X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:03:03 -0000 Hi Tools-Team, it seems as if I'm unable to sort by date: https://tools.ietf.org/wg/core/index.pyht?sort=3&reverse=1 (should be sorted by date, but is sorted by draft name). This was not the case a few days ago. Any ideas? Regards, Jojo P.S.: Please CC me, I'm not on this list. -- Dipl.-Inform. Johannes Gilger Research Group IT-Security RWTH Aachen University Mies-van-der-Rohe-Straße 15 52074 Aachen Office: 211 Phone: +49 241 80 20781 http://itsec.rwth-aachen.de From stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie Mon Nov 12 09:19:11 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60DD021F86DC for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:19:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.300, BAYES_50=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AiCGKq5zlbDP for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:19:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33E5321F86E1 for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:19:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 339DBBE47 for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 17:18:45 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X7vzepZlcK2C for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 17:18:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [IPv6:2001:770:10:203:961:bb92:4aba:a528] (unknown [IPv6:2001:770:10:203:961:bb92:4aba:a528]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27BB3BE2F for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 17:18:44 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <50A12F73.7020209@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 17:18:43 +0000 From: Stephen Farrell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121028 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "tools-discuss@ietf.org Discussion" References: <1352719614440daebe1444ec190fb1ce3afa711cd7_@medianetinfo.info> In-Reply-To: <1352719614440daebe1444ec190fb1ce3afa711cd7_@medianetinfo.info> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.5 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <1352719614440daebe1444ec190fb1ce3afa711cd7_@medianetinfo.info> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-discuss] possible new spam (was: Fwd: Community & educational development) X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 17:19:11 -0000 Feel free to ignore this, but just in case its the start of a new trend... I don't recall previously seeing spam directed to tools draft aliases that made it to my inbox. Cheers, S. PS: I can send the full headers if that's useful but it came via grenache and the message ID was: <1352719614440daebe1444ec190fb1ce3afa711cd7_@medianetinfo.info> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Community & educational development Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 17:04:13 +0000 (GMT) Resent-From: mail@medianetinfo.info Resent-To: stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:22:04 -0800 From: AP To: draft-farrell-kc@tools.ietf.org PRESS RELEASE The American Grants and Loans Catalog is now available. Our new and revised 2013 edition contains more than 2800 financial programs, subsidies, scholarships, grants and loans offered by the US federal government. In addition you will also have access to over 2400 programs funded by private corporations and foundations. That is over 5200 programs available through various sources of financial providing organizations. NEW: You will also have access to our live Database that is updated on a daily basis. This product also provides daily email alerts as programs are announced. The Database is also available with IP recognition. This allows you to login without a username or password (Great for libraries or educational institutions who want their users to access the database). Businesses, students, researchers, scientists, teachers, doctors, private individuals, municipalities, government departments, educational institutions, law enforcement agencies, nonprofits, foundations and associations will find a wealth of information that will help them with their new ventures or existing projects. The document is a fully searchable PDF file for easy access to your particular needs and interests. Simply enter your keywords to search through the publication. It is the perfect tool for libraries and educational institutions to use as a reference guide for students who require funds to pursue their education. Contents of the Directory: -Web link to program announcement page -Web link to Federal agency or foundation administering the program -Authorization upon which a program is based -Objectives and goals of the program -Types of financial assistance offered under a program -Uses and restrictions placed upon a program -Eligibility requirements -Application and award process -Regulations, guidelines and literature relevant to a program -Information contacts at the headquarters, regional, and local offices -Programs that are related based upon program objectives and uses Programs in the Catalog provide a wide range of benefits and services for categories such as: Agriculture Business and Commerce Community Development Consumer Protection Cultural Affairs Disaster Prevention and Relief Education Employment, Labor and Training Energy Environmental Quality Food and Nutrition Health Housing Income Security and Social Services Information and Statistics Law, Justice, and Legal Services Natural Resources Regional Development Science and Technology Transportation CD version: $69.95 Printed version: $149.95 To order please call: 1 (800) 610-4543 Please do not reply to the sender's email address as this address is only for outgoing mail. If you do not wish to receive information from us in the future please reply here: rem218@mail.com This is a CANSPAM ACT compliant advertising broadcast sent by: American Publishing Inc. , 7025 County Rd. 46A, Suite 1071, Lake Mary, FL, 32746-4753 From henrik@levkowetz.com Wed Nov 14 04:27:19 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50E9821F85F0 for ; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 04:27:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nYX3YMuNFvN4 for ; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 04:27:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [77.72.230.30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45CF221F85DB for ; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 04:27:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from brunello.netnod.se ([77.72.226.95]:50448) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TYc3a-0004OO-MH; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 13:27:03 +0100 Message-ID: <50A38E16.6030806@levkowetz.com> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 13:27:02 +0100 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Farrell References: <1352719614440daebe1444ec190fb1ce3afa711cd7_@medianetinfo.info> <50A12F73.7020209@cs.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: <50A12F73.7020209@cs.tcd.ie> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 77.72.226.95 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie, tools-discuss@ietf.org, henrik-sent@levkowetz.com 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 grenache.tools.ietf.org) Cc: "tools-discuss@ietf.org Discussion" Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] possible new spam X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 12:27:19 -0000 Hi Stephen, On 2012-11-12 18:18 Stephen Farrell said: > > Feel free to ignore this, but just in case its the > start of a new trend... I don't recall previously > seeing spam directed to tools draft aliases that > made it to my inbox. There's always been loads of spam coming in to those aliases, but mostly spamassassin catches it. I'll have a look at this particular case to see if tweaking is needed. Best regards, Henrik > Cheers, > S. > > PS: I can send the full headers if that's useful but > it came via grenache and the message ID was: > <1352719614440daebe1444ec190fb1ce3afa711cd7_@medianetinfo.info> > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Community & educational development > Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 17:04:13 +0000 (GMT) > Resent-From: mail@medianetinfo.info > Resent-To: stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie > Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:22:04 -0800 > From: AP > To: draft-farrell-kc@tools.ietf.org > > PRESS RELEASE > > The American Grants and Loans Catalog is now available. Our new and revised > 2013 edition contains more than 2800 financial programs, subsidies, > scholarships, > grants and loans offered by the US federal government. > > In addition you will also have access to over 2400 programs funded by > private > corporations and foundations. That is over 5200 programs available through > various sources of financial providing organizations. > > NEW: You will also have access to our live Database that is updated on a > daily > basis. This product also provides daily email alerts as programs are > announced. > > The Database is also available with IP recognition. This allows you to login > without a username or password (Great for libraries or educational > institutions > who want their users to access the database). > > Businesses, students, researchers, scientists, teachers, doctors, > private individuals, > municipalities, government departments, educational institutions, law > enforcement > agencies, nonprofits, foundations and associations will find a wealth of > information > that will help them with their new ventures or existing projects. > > The document is a fully searchable PDF file for easy access to your > particular > needs and interests. Simply enter your keywords to search through the > publication. > > It is the perfect tool for libraries and educational institutions to use > as a > reference guide for students who require funds to pursue their education. > > > Contents of the Directory: > > -Web link to program announcement page > -Web link to Federal agency or foundation administering the program > -Authorization upon which a program is based > -Objectives and goals of the program > -Types of financial assistance offered under a program > -Uses and restrictions placed upon a program > -Eligibility requirements > -Application and award process > -Regulations, guidelines and literature relevant to a program > -Information contacts at the headquarters, regional, and local offices > -Programs that are related based upon program objectives and uses > > > Programs in the Catalog provide a wide range of benefits and services > for categories such as: > > Agriculture > Business and Commerce > Community Development > Consumer Protection > Cultural Affairs > Disaster Prevention and Relief > Education > Employment, Labor and Training > Energy > Environmental Quality > Food and Nutrition > Health > Housing > Income Security and Social Services > Information and Statistics > Law, Justice, and Legal Services > Natural Resources > Regional Development > Science and Technology > Transportation > > > CD version: $69.95 > Printed version: $149.95 > > To order please call: 1 (800) 610-4543 > > > Please do not reply to the sender's email address as this address is > only for outgoing mail. > > If you do not wish to receive information from us in the future please > reply here: > rem218@mail.com > > This is a CANSPAM ACT compliant advertising broadcast sent by: > American Publishing Inc. , 7025 County Rd. 46A, Suite 1071, Lake Mary, > FL, 32746-4753 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tools-discuss mailing list > Tools-discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss > From mnot@mnot.net Wed Nov 14 23:46:19 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4660921F8618 for ; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:46:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.857 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.857 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.858, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_53=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gM4zFEoWXqsM for ; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:46:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B53121F876A for ; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:46:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.64] (unknown [118.209.81.233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D1306509B5 for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 02:46:14 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Nottingham Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:46:30 +1100 References: To: Tools discussion Message-Id: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Subject: [Tools-discuss] Fwd: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 07:46:19 -0000 FYI -- someone bounced my e-mail to a draft.all address based upon SPF. Not sure if this is a problem with their MTA or the tools forwarding = setup... Cheers, Begin forwarded message: > From: Mail Delivery System > Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender > Date: 15 November 2012 6:44:25 PM AEDT > To: mnot@mnot.net >=20 > This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. >=20 > A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its > recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) = failed: >=20 > peter@akayla.com > (generated from draft-ietf-pkix-est.all@tools.ietf.org) > SMTP error from remote mail server after DATA: > host smtp.secureserver.net [72.167.238.201]: 550 5.7.1 SPF = unauthorized mail is prohibited. > kent@bbn.com > (generated from draft-ietf-pkix-est.all@tools.ietf.org) > SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data: > host dfw-gate.raytheon.com [199.46.199.195]: 550 5.7.1 Sender = ID/SPF failed from IP 77.72.230.30 for PRA mnot@mnot.net, please forward = to the email administrators for mnot.net or have them contact = postmaster@raytheon.com >=20 > ------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. = ------ >=20 > Return-path: > Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net ([216.86.168.183]:19948) > by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtps = (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) > (Exim 4.77) > (envelope-from ) > id 1TYu7O-00029N-Ap > for draft-ietf-pkix-est.all@tools.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 = 08:44:11 +0100 > Received: from [192.168.1.64] (unknown [118.209.81.233]) > (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) > (No client certificate requested) > by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2618F509B5; > Thu, 15 Nov 2012 02:44:04 -0500 (EST) > From: Mark Nottingham > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:44:20 +1100 > Message-Id: <060AEB60-8E59-4AB2-A178-5874BE36AF71@mnot.net> > Cc: Apps Discuss > To: draft-ietf-pkix-est.all@tools.ietf.org > Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) > X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) > X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 216.86.168.183 > X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: draft-ietf-pkix-est.all@tools.ietf.org > X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mnot@mnot.net > X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on > grenache.tools.ietf.org > X-Spam-Level:=20 > X-Spam-Status: No, score=3D-1.9 required=3D3.0 = tests=3DBAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS, > SPF_PASS autolearn=3Dno version=3D3.3.2 > Subject: APPDIR review of draft-ietf-pkix-est-03 > X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) > X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on grenache.tools.ietf.org) > Resent-To: dharkins@arubanetworks.com, kent@bbn.com,, = peter@akayla.com, pritikin@cisco.com, stefan@aaa-sec.com >=20 > I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for = =3D > this draft (for background on appsdir, please see =3D > = http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate = =3D > ). >=20 > Document: draft-ietf-pkix-est-03 > Title: Enrollment over Secure Transport > Reviewer: Mark Nottingham > Review Date: 15-Nov-2012 >=20 > Summary: This draft is not ready for publication as a Proposed = Standard =3D > and should be revised before publication. >=20 > Major Issues:=3D20 >=20 > As written, this draft violates BCP56, "On the use of HTTP as a =3D > Substrate:" >=20 >> 2. New protocols - including but not limited to those using HTTP - >> should not attempt to circumvent users' firewall policies, >> particularly by masquerading as existing protocols. >> "Substantially new services" should not reuse existing ports. >> =3D20 >> 3. In general, new protocols or services should not reuse http: or >> other URL schemes. >=20 >=20 > While there has been longstanding discussion about obsoleting BCP56, =3D= > because it's acknowledged that HTTP is useful for other protocols, = that =3D > document has not yet been published.=3D20 >=20 > However, when it is, it's very likely to embody the intent behind =3D > RFC5785 -- that the HTTP URI namespace of hosts is under their =3D > individual control, and that standards ought not impinge upon it in = any =3D > way, except in the limited ways described by that document. >=20 > In other words, IETF standards should not define URIs or patterns of =3D= > URIs, because servers may wish to provide other services (implying the = =3D > possibility of collision), or deploy resources in an alternate way, = for =3D > implementation or operational reasons.=3D20 >=20 > This is a fundamental concept in the Web architecture; see =3D > .=3D20 >=20 > Possible remedies include: >=20 > 1) Specifying a "home document" format that links (in the RFC5988 = sense) =3D > to the various resources as appropriate.=3D20 > 2) Specifying a well-known URI to root the interaction. Note that this = =3D > is suboptimal; while it avoids collisions, it does not allow alternate = =3D > deployments, or multiple deployments on the same host. >=20 > Regards, >=20 > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ >=20 >=20 >=20 -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ From sm@resistor.net Thu Nov 15 02:49:49 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD52B21F8A9C for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 02:49:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.192 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.192 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.193, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_53=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b-fbiU8Wec-B for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 02:49:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2812C21F8A35 for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 02:49:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qAFAngLN003132; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 02:49:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1352976587; bh=+HALxvFagToZxu0dFt4FgxYeqwEoB+seEROl0ebAMVQ=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=XKKduNV0aikVOGKU9d3ZYvllg2AsHSxGh2+YvlLgaKkrcRmI6dKPDxTr95w1RvZbs WY3dNy3lsemuoYpvJ3RHjfa4ob3Uk/nmbxwH1bn7Xgf7EaZJRGwHiktsIZ13EddNKC p42N/3ij2eoLma2tE5mHfKDyWLalsgW6UlAdpm5Y= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1352976587; i=@resistor.net; bh=+HALxvFagToZxu0dFt4FgxYeqwEoB+seEROl0ebAMVQ=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=FlUn+4CbytSUDM+o+3NJ755296rhwXKRWZhBSJu1pyHpUdGLvkNvpKZaFe7khdVzJ X1+1Wl8T5earW6SePr8tCk5d0I7dijRH7KDe10/bzmYUilr77ClAXFd7bPPOZ/EiPG oObSn6lorUEJgwoFHjhCvTa2yfcXvn3i1qbgk+iY= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 02:48:57 -0800 To: Mark Nottingham From: SM In-Reply-To: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> References: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Fwd: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:49:49 -0000 Hi Mark, At 23:46 14-11-2012, Mark Nottingham wrote: >FYI -- someone bounced my e-mail to a draft.all address based upon SPF. > >Not sure if this is a problem with their MTA or the tools forwarding setup... This is the SPF record for mnot.net: v=spf1 a:cloud.mnot.net a:mail.internode.on.net include:customer-spf.mxes.net -all mnot.net is telling the raytheon.com that mail from mnot.net will only come from the hosts mentioned above. The problem is the SPF record for mnot.net does not expect its messages from that domain to go through forwarders. The alternatives are: (i) Change the "-all" (ii) Add entries to allow messages from that email address to come from the tools.ietf.org SMTP server (iii) Do nothing as the person who requested the review has been notified that it has been performed Regards, -sm From mnot@mnot.net Thu Nov 15 02:55:06 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D03121F841E for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 02:55:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.755 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.755 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.756, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_53=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iquhKaLronFd for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 02:55:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB96B21F85CC for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 02:55:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.64] (unknown [118.209.81.233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5C6D1509B6; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 05:55:03 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 21:55:25 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9B7D72CE-B948-41B5-B3ED-DE1796ED4EFB@mnot.net> References: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> To: SM X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Fwd: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:55:06 -0000 It appears that the mailing list isn't rewriting Return-Path -- this is = AIUI good practice and necessary (for the reasons we see here, among = others). Cheers, On 15/11/2012, at 9:48 PM, SM wrote: > Hi Mark, > At 23:46 14-11-2012, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> FYI -- someone bounced my e-mail to a draft.all address based upon = SPF. >>=20 >> Not sure if this is a problem with their MTA or the tools forwarding = setup... >=20 > This is the SPF record for mnot.net: >=20 > v=3Dspf1 a:cloud.mnot.net a:mail.internode.on.net = include:customer-spf.mxes.net -all >=20 > mnot.net is telling the raytheon.com that mail from mnot.net will only = come from the hosts mentioned above. The problem is the SPF record for = mnot.net does not expect its messages from that domain to go through = forwarders. >=20 > The alternatives are: >=20 > (i) Change the "-all" >=20 > (ii) Add entries to allow messages from that email address to come = from > the tools.ietf.org SMTP server >=20 > (iii) Do nothing as the person who requested the review has been = notified > that it has been performed >=20 > Regards, > -sm=20 -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ From sm@resistor.net Thu Nov 15 03:48:36 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9124621F852D for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 03:48:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.486 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.486 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.113, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M43gTeCUOLCP for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 03:48:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB85F21F853B for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 03:48:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qAFBmUHY009028; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 03:48:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1352980115; bh=/H94xli0HgsvSevCuxbhLLTK2V8iRLWOnDetyZkvR/E=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=oImC/2Gfj5BuFJjBdwRB20gTJUGXRLf0Mfe26O/Qk1F9ho3CmDxB/+kzNUnvPoLMG oxzjQwszsbr5LoW4gAi7tDPtlwFcAP0Va5DrY0hGWXLINBTC9W9PlnPLCMb3WsCH+k 8BWiLpXkl9f24o1MgOsg1bFtsFUEGKWywB+VgvII= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1352980115; i=@resistor.net; bh=/H94xli0HgsvSevCuxbhLLTK2V8iRLWOnDetyZkvR/E=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=Rz/K7LCjXXIZSnB6lH1t/prhy/9JMdxzEPYtheLoZjXeMgAjPRv1MQHujVwJJiAdz awIwO4Pl/EmNzkHpaZTJAPxHO1QEPX47hO6+cyrN4mPJPRQx1VXl277XcOHBQvijsi NGesyLqcbuu/nUw+DOB1wc93HDCS756oVz6uRMJQ= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20121115033135.06221980@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 03:47:27 -0800 To: Mark Nottingham From: SM In-Reply-To: <9B7D72CE-B948-41B5-B3ED-DE1796ED4EFB@mnot.net> References: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> <9B7D72CE-B948-41B5-B3ED-DE1796ED4EFB@mnot.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Fwd: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 11:48:36 -0000 Hi Mark, At 02:55 15-11-2012, Mark Nottingham wrote: >It appears that the mailing list isn't rewriting Return-Path -- this >is AIUI good practice and necessary (for the reasons we see here, >among others). The issue has been discussed in the SPFBIS WG (see Issue #12). It is mentioned in the minutes ( http://tools.ietf.org/wg/spfbis/minutes?item=minutes-83-spfbis.html ). There was also discussion on the mailing list ( http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/spfbis/current/msg02207.html ). Discussions about the practice tend to be controversial. Regards, -sm From mnot@mnot.net Thu Nov 15 03:56:37 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B59AE21F8772 for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 03:56:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.96 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.96 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.361, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MbFCG4u6U6Wl for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 03:56:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18B2221F859D for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 03:56:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from mnot-mini.mnot.net (unknown [118.209.81.233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BF29A509B5; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 06:56:35 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20121115033135.06221980@resistor.net> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 22:56:59 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <2DC8CAEB-525A-428D-805D-7E6E60A9766F@mnot.net> References: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> <9B7D72CE-B948-41B5-B3ED-DE1796ED4EFB@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115033135.06221980@resistor.net> To: SM X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Fwd: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 11:56:37 -0000 Well, it appears to be a requirement of RFC4408, section 9.2, unless = that's been superseded. Are we not bothering to follow our own advice? On 15/11/2012, at 10:47 PM, SM wrote: > Hi Mark, > At 02:55 15-11-2012, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> It appears that the mailing list isn't rewriting Return-Path -- this = is AIUI good practice and necessary (for the reasons we see here, among = others). >=20 > The issue has been discussed in the SPFBIS WG (see Issue #12). It is = mentioned in the minutes ( = http://tools.ietf.org/wg/spfbis/minutes?item=3Dminutes-83-spfbis.html ). = There was also discussion on the mailing list ( = http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/spfbis/current/msg02207.html ). = Discussions about the practice tend to be controversial. >=20 > Regards, > -sm =20 -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ From sm@resistor.net Thu Nov 15 09:25:37 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEDFD21F84FF for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:25:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.489 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.489 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.110, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wla794sw-JDo for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:25:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5FA21F841A for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:25:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qAFHPQk5021137; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:25:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1353000333; bh=pPbU03jCdsCW+9EPyj/q/dQv5IfVm2KuCKBsgkL9m2Q=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=KhamSUH8QT4bTWToTsqsmux+lvPb4bjBhGERA3oBxKp2nraEszmirwXfJXTMW3uLD RZ18GmzbN85OtoaUa9CaS710CQZVNWXs+5n56/x0AEDPk8CsTQEpRI/TsIjrVs4jGN ZRIGOmHG5k/F6uFFNt5r1IDCPt04ElC8TmNKenec= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1353000333; i=@resistor.net; bh=pPbU03jCdsCW+9EPyj/q/dQv5IfVm2KuCKBsgkL9m2Q=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=Cahp44H+Ok6JnW5kc/lIB0IovP9VdUqk+RSjbn9uX8jnZ5IJUBLw+vjnJ5rPCSVCM +XNgHa3Ep+l/plpkz5ZWWkR6vJF9q/0518ggkkupCEMj48IYt/WfVBJnMWNc1L29r0 VUK35D7E9274+tZOYHlXw0nyq12ILfsp8ame+biI= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20121115074740.0a4beeb0@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 07:56:56 -0800 To: Mark Nottingham From: SM In-Reply-To: <2DC8CAEB-525A-428D-805D-7E6E60A9766F@mnot.net> References: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> <9B7D72CE-B948-41B5-B3ED-DE1796ED4EFB@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115033135.06221980@resistor.net> <2DC8CAEB-525A-428D-805D-7E6E60A9766F@mnot.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Fwd: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:25:38 -0000 Hi Mark, At 03:56 15-11-2012, Mark Nottingham wrote: >Well, it appears to be a requirement of RFC4408, section 9.2, unless >that's been superseded. Are we not bothering to follow our own advice? As mention in the IESG Note RFC 4408 did not go through IETF review. Section 9 of that RFC is labelled as non-normative. There are diverging opinions about draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis and some of the advice in it. Regards, -sm From mnot@mnot.net Thu Nov 15 13:17:22 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B30C521F8557 for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:17:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.882 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.882 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.283, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vNpT9zPOmarh for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:17:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADE4021F852B for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:17:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.71] (unknown [118.209.81.233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EAD5B509B9; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:17:19 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20121115074740.0a4beeb0@resistor.net> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:17:16 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <81D03339-9E96-421A-A9EA-817211F55C61@mnot.net> References: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> <9B7D72CE-B948-41B5-B3ED-DE1796ED4EFB@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115033135.06221980@resistor.net> <2DC8CAEB-525A-428D-805D-7E6E60A9766F@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115074740.0a4beeb0@resistor.net> To: SM X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 21:17:23 -0000 Well, consider this to be technical input -- the mailing list breaks = when you don't do Return-Path rewriting.=20 People can have all of the opinions they want :) On 16/11/2012, at 2:56 AM, SM wrote: > Hi Mark, > At 03:56 15-11-2012, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> Well, it appears to be a requirement of RFC4408, section 9.2, unless = that's been superseded. Are we not bothering to follow our own advice? >=20 > As mention in the IESG Note RFC 4408 did not go through IETF review. = Section 9 of that RFC is labelled as non-normative. There are diverging = opinions about draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis and some of the advice in it. >=20 > Regards, > -sm=20 -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ From henrik@levkowetz.com Thu Nov 15 13:34:42 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49C7B21F8A05; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:34:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ex2OAhqzWB16; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:34:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from merlot.tools.ietf.org (merlot.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:0:31::14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91B5A21F8A2A; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:34:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50270 helo=vigonier.lan) by merlot.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TZ74Q-0001l9-4i; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 22:34:01 +0100 Message-ID: <50A55FC2.6020306@levkowetz.com> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 22:33:54 +0100 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:10.0.10) Gecko/20121024 Thunderbird/10.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tools Team Discussion X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: tools-discuss@ietf.org, adam@nostrum.com, henrik@levkowetz.com, housley@vigilsec.com, jmh@joelhalpern.com, olau@iola.dk, rcross@amsl.com, rjsparks@nostrum.com, suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com, fenner@fenron.com, codesprints@ietf.org, eronenp@gmail.com, henrik-sent@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on merlot.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:06:45 -0800 Cc: jmh@joelhalpern.com, Code Sprint , housley@vigilsec.com, suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com, Bill Fenner , Henrik Levkowetz , rjsparks@nostrum.com Subject: [Tools-discuss] Datatracker code stats X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 21:34:42 -0000 Hi, To satisfy my own curiosity, I added a stats plugin to the issue and code tracker for the datatracker today. It doesn't really tell us a lot that we didn't sort-of know already, but it's still interesting to see the growth in code size since the start. Have a look if you have the time: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb/stats/code Best regards, Henrik From henrik@levkowetz.com Fri Nov 16 04:51:36 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E61F21F87F9 for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 04:51:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2caWyo+WnyUX for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 04:51:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [77.72.230.30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0136B21F84C5 for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 04:51:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from brunello.netnod.se ([77.72.226.95]:61398) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_CAMELLIA_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TZLOC-0005Py-OD; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 13:51:21 +0100 Message-ID: <50A636C8.300@levkowetz.com> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 13:51:20 +0100 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Nottingham References: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> <9B7D72CE-B948-41B5-B3ED-DE1796ED4EFB@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115033135.06221980@resistor.net> <2DC8CAEB-525A-428D-805D-7E6E60A9766F@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115074740.0a4beeb0@resistor.net> <81D03339-9E96-421A-A9EA-817211F55C61@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: <81D03339-9E96-421A-A9EA-817211F55C61@mnot.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 77.72.226.95 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: mnot@mnot.net, sm@resistor.net, tools-discuss@ietf.org, henrik-sent@levkowetz.com 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 grenache.tools.ietf.org) Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 12:51:36 -0000 Hi Mark, I've turned on envelope-from rewriting. I've had this set up for quite some time, but got bogged down in getting it announced. Now it seems to me that delaying it has a larger downside than the surprises that may result from turning it on. Best regards, Henrik On 2012-11-15 22:17 Mark Nottingham said: > Well, consider this to be technical input -- the mailing list breaks when you don't do Return-Path rewriting. > > People can have all of the opinions they want :) > > > On 16/11/2012, at 2:56 AM, SM wrote: > >> Hi Mark, >> At 03:56 15-11-2012, Mark Nottingham wrote: >>> Well, it appears to be a requirement of RFC4408, section 9.2, unless that's been superseded. Are we not bothering to follow our own advice? >> >> As mention in the IESG Note RFC 4408 did not go through IETF review. Section 9 of that RFC is labelled as non-normative. There are diverging opinions about draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis and some of the advice in it. >> >> Regards, >> -sm > > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tools-discuss mailing list > Tools-discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss > From dhc2@dcrocker.net Fri Nov 16 06:58:25 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1202A21F893C for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 06:58:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.956 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.956 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY=1.643] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M6u2pGlnJdys for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 06:58:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23DA621F8853 for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 06:58:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.9] (adsl-67-127-56-94.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.56.94]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qAGEwGCe022124 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 16 Nov 2012 06:58:19 -0800 Message-ID: <50A6547F.3060004@dcrocker.net> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 06:58:07 -0800 From: Dave Crocker Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Nottingham References: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> <9B7D72CE-B948-41B5-B3ED-DE1796ED4EFB@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115033135.06221980@resistor.net> <2DC8CAEB-525A-428D-805D-7E6E60A9766F@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115074740.0a4beeb0@resistor.net> <81D03339-9E96-421A-A9EA-817211F55C61@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: <81D03339-9E96-421A-A9EA-817211F55C61@mnot.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Fri, 16 Nov 2012 06:58:23 -0800 (PST) Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 14:58:25 -0000 On 11/15/2012 1:17 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > Well, consider this to be technical input -- the mailing list breaks when you don't do Return-Path rewriting. > > People can have all of the opinions they want :) Let me get this straight: YOUR organization sets the -all value to SPF, which has a particular meaning that is extremely well-known to break when a message goes through a mailing list. By 'well-known' I mean that it's at the core of SPF's design limitation, which is why SPF is typically referred to as a path-based mechanism. Simply put, your sending through a mailing list explicitly violates the semantics of -all. However you are asserting that it is the responsible of a well-behaved intermediary to change, rather than your own organization's configuration, which is the configuration that is actually causing the failure? This is all quite typical of email's history, of course, with operations down the handling sequence being expected to change for misbehaviors at the source. It's going to be interesting to see what you demand when your organization publishes a similarly inappropriate DMARC record, which requires alignment between the rfc5322.From field and SPF and/or DKIM records. Will you require that the From: field now be falsified? For the specific problem cited in this thread, you need to change your SPF configuration. That said, the rfc5321.MailFrom field is typically best set to the latest posting agent, so that error messages go to the operator most likely to be able to do something about them. (Mailing lists post a new message. The fact that it looks quite similar to a message that was "delivered" to it -- sufficiently similar to permit replying back to the original poster -- is convenient. But in terms of email handling. the list takes final delivery of a message -- the one with the SPF record, for example -- and posts a new one. d/ ps. SM is, of course, correct that the currently-published version of SPF is listed as experimental, not standards track. But the problem cited in this thread does not get better, worse or different when SPFbis is published: Mark's organization is configured wrong. To be explicit and repetition: That's not "opinion"; it's at the core of SPF semantics. -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From sm@resistor.net Fri Nov 16 08:21:41 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F54821F8669 for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:21:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.5 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.099, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h+zExlx5-7Qq for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:21:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B4F321F852B for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:21:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qAGGLVMW023945; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:21:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1353082895; bh=/aoquENXut3ofSF2SmRtGkBDeps8yOIv0vYBstiH2S4=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=Ilc0rotvvM1DygFS51gk/nCo49/O3kw+PQ5BrWpj1wdTXmbT1COOEXsloorzKEXz1 wvdg7ZWfmJtXMyQs2DMNReiTu65YaPKrtGjcQMv6garJX2xaorH8KA60Mx6fkeng2I 2orSDNExBffwvztzQ6C47c9RG8+NKq1PgU57zXq0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1353082895; i=@resistor.net; bh=/aoquENXut3ofSF2SmRtGkBDeps8yOIv0vYBstiH2S4=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=DbJR7eEuKf6XEqwxE3lEb5PvSrY5arLn0S9qUcY9CeLrihZsH1EFfS/lJKKkYUgS5 +KCYcXaQ21pAuL/bzZp56503jSN9l9bB0ZyhfgLjOo8DU5XmG/opjmnGSJ2NOlPEFl 0e3lqBD0ymBxMJ9z7XelEdpcn9hrMLLtmrPrfrEA= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20121116075719.0a615b70@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:17:05 -0800 To: dcrocker@bbiw.net From: SM In-Reply-To: <50A6547F.3060004@dcrocker.net> References: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> <9B7D72CE-B948-41B5-B3ED-DE1796ED4EFB@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115033135.06221980@resistor.net> <2DC8CAEB-525A-428D-805D-7E6E60A9766F@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115074740.0a4beeb0@resistor.net> <81D03339-9E96-421A-A9EA-817211F55C61@mnot.net> <50A6547F.3060004@dcrocker.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 16:21:41 -0000 Hi Dave, At 06:58 16-11-2012, Dave Crocker wrote: >ps. SM is, of course, correct that the currently-published version >of SPF is listed as experimental, not standards track. But the >problem cited in this thread does not get better, worse or different >when SPFbis is published: Mark's organization is configured I made a mistake which I did not try to correct; the rejection message mentioned "PRA". I agree that the the problem won't be better or worse. I would have commented more if there wasn't a working group discussing about the specification. Regards, -sm From dcrocker@bbiw.net Fri Nov 16 08:26:47 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54A8121F86AB for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:26:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.777 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.777 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.822, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PzdujhQ2CJ9p for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:26:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4BD721F8688 for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:26:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.6] (adsl-67-127-56-119.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.56.119]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qAGGQkju023687 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:26:46 -0800 Message-ID: <50A6693D.7000307@bbiw.net> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:26:37 -0800 From: Dave Crocker Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tools discussion References: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> <9B7D72CE-B948-41B5-B3ED-DE1796ED4EFB@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115033135.06221980@resistor.net> <2DC8CAEB-525A-428D-805D-7E6E60A9766F@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115074740.0a4beeb0@resistor.net> <81D03339-9E96-421A-A9EA-817211F55C61@mnot.net> <50A6547F.3060004@dcrocker.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121116075719.0a615b70@resistor.net> In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20121116075719.0a615b70@resistor.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:26:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 16:26:47 -0000 On 11/16/2012 8:17 AM, SM wrote: >But the problem >> cited in this thread does not get better, worse or different when >> SPFbis is published: Mark's organization is configured > > I made a mistake which I did not try to correct; the rejection message > mentioned "PRA". I agree that the the problem won't be better or > worse. I would have commented more if there wasn't a working group > discussing about the specification. I cannot emphasize enough that I think the status of the document and the existence of the working group are actually irrelevant to the reported problem. The technical and operational point at issue here is fundamental to the design and semantic of SPF. No status change or working group topic under consideration has or will have any effect on the problem. To alter the basic problem would require fundamentally changing SPF. A sending site is using SPF. The sending site is publishing a record that does not work for the scenario being created by the sending site. All of the problem is with and by the sending site. Get rid of the -all. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From mnot@mnot.net Sat Nov 17 04:08:24 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72F8221F8C42 for ; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:08:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.506 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.506 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.907, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5-cy5Bntbq3D for ; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:08:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D419621F854B for ; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:08:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.64] (unknown [118.209.151.16]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 442E922E200; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 07:08:08 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <50A6547F.3060004@dcrocker.net> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 23:08:05 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1C239308-E174-4D60-80C4-18046E894FF4@mnot.net> References: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> <9B7D72CE-B948-41B5-B3ED-DE1796ED4EFB@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115033135.06221980@resistor.net> <2DC8CAEB-525A-428D-805D-7E6E60A9766F@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115074740.0a4beeb0@resistor.net> <81D03339-9E96-421A-A9EA-817211F55C61@mnot.net> <50A6547F.3060004@dcrocker.net> To: dcrocker@bbiw.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 12:08:24 -0000 No need to get snippy, Dave - I was just reporting something that didn't = work. I don't have the time, energy or inclination to get in the middle = of e-mail standardisation fights, as much as others may enjoy them. Regards, On 17/11/2012, at 1:58 AM, Dave Crocker wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 11/15/2012 1:17 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> Well, consider this to be technical input -- the mailing list breaks = when you don't do Return-Path rewriting. >>=20 >> People can have all of the opinions they want :) >=20 >=20 > Let me get this straight: >=20 > YOUR organization sets the -all value to SPF, which has a = particular meaning that is extremely well-known to break when a message = goes through a mailing list. By 'well-known' I mean that it's at the = core of SPF's design limitation, which is why SPF is typically referred = to as a path-based mechanism. Simply put, your sending through a = mailing list explicitly violates the semantics of -all. >=20 > However you are asserting that it is the responsible of a = well-behaved intermediary to change, rather than your own organization's = configuration, which is the configuration that is actually causing the = failure? >=20 >=20 > This is all quite typical of email's history, of course, with = operations down the handling sequence being expected to change for = misbehaviors at the source. >=20 > It's going to be interesting to see what you demand when your = organization publishes a similarly inappropriate DMARC record, which = requires alignment between the rfc5322.=46rom field and SPF and/or DKIM = records. Will you require that the From: field now be falsified? >=20 > For the specific problem cited in this thread, you need > to change your SPF configuration. >=20 > That said, the rfc5321.Mail=46rom field is typically best set to the = latest posting agent, so that error messages go to the operator most = likely to be able to do something about them. (Mailing lists post a new = message. >=20 > The fact that it looks quite similar to a message that was "delivered" = to it -- sufficiently similar to permit replying back to the original = poster -- is convenient. But in terms of email handling. the list takes = final delivery of a message -- the one with the SPF record, for example = -- and posts a new one. >=20 > d/ >=20 > ps. SM is, of course, correct that the currently-published version of = SPF is listed as experimental, not standards track. But the problem = cited in this thread does not get better, worse or different when SPFbis = is published: Mark's organization is configured wrong. To be explicit = and repetition: That's not "opinion"; it's at the core of SPF = semantics. >=20 > --=20 > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > bbiw.net -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ From dhc2@dcrocker.net Sun Nov 18 07:18:48 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA0E121F84CC for ; Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:18:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.478 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.478 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.478, BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cp38GxcMRUjD for ; Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:18:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0813D21F84C6 for ; Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:18:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.9] (adsl-67-127-56-119.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.56.119]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qAIFIkDt009004 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:18:46 -0800 Message-ID: <50A8FC55.8060809@dcrocker.net> Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:18:45 -0800 From: Dave Crocker Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Nottingham References: <6BE4B32A-E6EE-4575-8262-078955296A51@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115023432.0b6bc910@resistor.net> <9B7D72CE-B948-41B5-B3ED-DE1796ED4EFB@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115033135.06221980@resistor.net> <2DC8CAEB-525A-428D-805D-7E6E60A9766F@mnot.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121115074740.0a4beeb0@resistor.net> <81D03339-9E96-421A-A9EA-817211F55C61@mnot.net> <50A6547F.3060004@dcrocker.net> <1C239308-E174-4D60-80C4-18046E894FF4@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: <1C239308-E174-4D60-80C4-18046E894FF4@mnot.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:18:47 -0800 (PST) Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:18:48 -0000 On 11/17/2012 4:08 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > No need to get snippy, Dave - I was just reporting something that > didn't work. I don't have the time, energy or inclination to get in > the middle of e-mail standardisation fights, as much as others may > enjoy them. Sure there is. You did not 'just report' a problem. Your series of notes claimed a diagnosis and cure, citing a purportedly controlling spec. However is an unreviewed Experimental spec which purports to have an SPF publisher dictate behaviors on typically unsuspecting intermediaries -- they can't be expected to know or care about SPF, nevermind conform to its random dictates. In other words, the normative bit you cited in RFC4408 is simply silly. It's silly in a pretty classic way, by virtue of misunderstanding what its scope of control is, but that merely increases the silliness, IMO. For reference, the current IETF working group to revise that spec has eliminated such arrogance from the spec. But that spec, too, isn't approved yet. The more interesting citation is RFC 5321 which attempts to dictate the rfc5321.MailFrom modification, for the same reason I cited in my snippy note: to make it more likely that a responsible agent will get informed of a problem. However also as I observed in my snippy note, the underlying operational philosophy that is represented by the thread doesn't scale: for example, the same diagnostic and repair model will not work when applied to a sender's misuse of DMARC. Concerning this portion of RFC5321, there is a basic problem: Operationally, plenty of mailing lists do not change the rfc5321.MailFrom. When there is sufficiently widespread non-conformance to a long-standing standard, the problem is with the standard, not the non-conformance. d/ ps. As snippiness goes, mine was pretty mild here. We've both been around the IETF long enough to have experience with what less mild looks like... -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From rafiee@hpi.uni-potsdam.de Fri Nov 23 08:23:14 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AD7621F8536 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 08:23:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.464 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.464 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.705, BAYES_05=-1.11, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r8XBA-eHsxNZ for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 08:23:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail2.hpi.uni-potsdam.de (mail2.hpi.uni-potsdam.de [IPv6:2001:638:807:204::8d59:e17a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF2DF21F85B3 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 08:23:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from owa2.hpi.uni-potsdam.de (owa2.hpi.uni-potsdam.de [141.89.225.162]) by mail2.hpi.uni-potsdam.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86110D2C95 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 17:23:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from 8MXMA1R.hpi.uni-potsdam.de ([fe80::88e9:3d98:b35f:83bf]) by OWA2.hpi.uni-potsdam.de ([2002:8d59:e1a2::8d59:e1a2]) with mapi; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 17:23:08 +0100 From: "Rafiee, Hosnieh" To: "tools-discuss@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 17:23:07 +0100 Thread-Topic: a RFC tool for writing draft Thread-Index: Ac3JltIwZAX05+0ZSjWUaSI9+C40Gg== Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, de-DE Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_EA738325B0580041A50A364F5F76B68924DA4E6B538MXMA1Rhpiuni_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [Tools-discuss] a RFC tool for writing draft X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 16:23:14 -0000 --_000_EA738325B0580041A50A364F5F76B68924DA4E6B538MXMA1Rhpiuni_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, I have created a web application that can be used to format a RFC. It can b= e found at http://editor.rozanak.com. Just foll= ow the directions for filling in the data and then save it. A file will be = created in text format that can be uploaded to the IEFT database. It gives = you the capability for further editing and it can preview what you have cre= ated. I used it to create my latest draft which I then submitted successful= ly. Give it a try and see what you think. Hosnieh --_000_EA738325B0580041A50A364F5F76B68924DA4E6B538MXMA1Rhpiuni_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello,

 

I have created a web application that can be used= to format a RFC. It can be found at http://editor.rozanak.com. Just follow the direction= s for filling in the data and then save it. A file will be created in text = format that can be uploaded to the IEFT database. It gives you the capabili= ty for further editing and it can preview what you have created. I used it = to create my latest draft which I then submitted successfully. Give it a tr= y and see what you think.

 

Hosnieh

= --_000_EA738325B0580041A50A364F5F76B68924DA4E6B538MXMA1Rhpiuni_-- From rbarnes@bbn.com Sat Nov 24 17:05:49 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 714E321F8595 for ; Sat, 24 Nov 2012 17:05:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.439 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.439 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.254, BAYES_40=-0.185, GB_I_LETTER=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kRSszYMEOJDe for ; Sat, 24 Nov 2012 17:05:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.bbn.com (smtp.bbn.com [128.33.1.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E80521F8594 for ; Sat, 24 Nov 2012 17:05:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.89.255.119] (port=49567) by smtp.bbn.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1TcQfJ-0001aD-IG for tools-discuss@ietf.org; Sat, 24 Nov 2012 20:05:45 -0500 From: "Richard L. Barnes" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2012 20:05:44 -0500 References: To: tools-discuss@ietf.org Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 08:03:02 -0800 Subject: [Tools-discuss] Fwd: Newsletter - new product for temperature alarm and monitoring X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 01:05:49 -0000 Anyone else getting spam via tools aliases? Begin forwarded message: > Resent-From: wg-alias-bounces@tools.ietf.org > From: PingBrother > Subject: Newsletter - new product for temperature alarm and monitoring > Date: November 21, 2012 4:54:30 PM EST > Resent-To: acooper@cdt.org, rbarnes@bbn.com > To: geopriv-chairs@tools.ietf.org > Reply-To: sales@pingbrother.com >=20 >=20 >=20 > New product - EPIW104F > =20 > Primed for temperature remote monitoring and alarm > =20 > With its two temperature sensors, PingBrother EPIW104F can efficiently = monitor temperature and intervene automatically to changes in = temperature or voltage. It also watches the operability of attached = network devices and can give a user defined response. It can control any = connected device by its relay contact, and/or send an email, making it = usable as a remotely adjustable thermostat that can send you a warning = e-mail if need be. > =20 > It has retained all the other useful features the product series are = known for. The major ones are: > - 4 port ethernet switch > - Ping/HTTP watchdog function > - managable POE outputs > - Client software for monitoring multiple devices > - Automatic or remote controlled monitoring of devices through trigger = output > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 > APP. EXAMPLES > PingBrother is a multi functional device. Eth. switch, POE injector, = remote management device, and so on. Read More =BB >=20 > VIDEO PRESENTATION > Watch our video presentation showing you PinBrother in action. Read = More =BB >=20 > =20 > =20 > =20 > =20 > =20 > subscribe unsubscribe > PingBrother=20 > Mikroweb Internet Ltd, Hungary, Phone: +36 1 5999000 > Email: sales@pingbrother.com // Website: http://www.pingbrother.com From sm@resistor.net Sun Nov 25 08:57:23 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BBA221F85D8 for ; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 08:57:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.088, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w9lZ6w7CEarV for ; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 08:57:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12A9021F85D4 for ; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 08:57:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qAPGvCxT019158; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 08:57:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1353862637; bh=LfZTTzitqRfwhaPx8ZK3KLi5/m4I30+RvzknHfiM5yE=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=pepsndHOubzxhfPevgGGjNgIQTQ6u5nQemVnAR8v9OHtSOpGYRaPQ7LAOTH+lGD7U WwiLRHKqPbIcvsDHkrCgh6enzda5/VKOt4HYcHA3/DwmWW6yMd9cGoj5SBDHSBTn31 V5ZgzrAb9qqDw4dKj8vo8X/v45OWpDNElnbt51BE= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1353862637; i=@resistor.net; bh=LfZTTzitqRfwhaPx8ZK3KLi5/m4I30+RvzknHfiM5yE=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=ayYHBWFTcrPEwWdAdcL1eThl44ztmbK20qpj4dsLXkMx+yfYnK0fxLNDuxADJ84Ri mFU4fZKdsc5eMbA3pGTCRz4bEDyZ9oQpRpzfBOpb9W3Gz1FGgaKD0j8eeCRYtaplj0 OVJnre5R0rl8CreSNCVmo97ApqAVsWswNk9HyXdE= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20121125084205.09cb0ed0@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 08:52:22 -0800 To: "Richard L. Barnes" From: SM In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Fwd: Newsletter - new product for temperature alarm and monitoring X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 16:57:23 -0000 Hi Richard, At 17:05 24-11-2012, Richard L. Barnes wrote: >Anyone else getting spam via tools aliases? An errant message gets through every now and then. See edited headers below: Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [77.72.230.30]) by [REMOVED] (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qAM0BQY1013097 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <[REMOVED]>; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 16:11:32 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 16:11:32 -0800 (PST) Resent-From: wg-alias-bounces@tools.ietf.org Resent-Message-Id: <201211220011.qAM0BQY1013097@[REMOVED]> Received: from mail.mikroweb.hu ([194.152.143.74]:59005 helo=mikroweb.hu) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TbKNi-0004pO-L0 for [REMOVED]; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 01:11:03 +0100 Received: from [10.1.171.20] by mikroweb.hu with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TbIDd-0002VL-HP for [REMOVED]@tools.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 22:52:31 +0100 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="===============1428450483==" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: [REMOVED]@tools.ietf.org From: PingBrother Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 22:52:22 +0100 Reply-To: sales@pingbrother.com Message-ID: X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.152.143.74 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: [REMOVED]@tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: sales@pingbrother.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on grenache.tools.ietf.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_08, HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=3.3.2 Subject: Newsletter - new product for temperature alarm and monitoring X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on grenache.tools.ietf.org) Regards, -sm From nico@cryptonector.com Wed Nov 28 22:16:35 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BD7121F8A2A for ; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:16:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pWaqJl2qd8vB for ; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:16:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from homiemail-a87.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdccac.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.202]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46C4421F87E8 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:16:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from homiemail-a87.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a87.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C362626C063 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:16:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=ZIOolFmGCZcP5emSk3SQ PyXWquc=; b=iDlVg1yRbwspszb1cbH15i7rZWQ9F2GWsTzxPSegeWX4kGdLuikp tJuuBQQ0G7AQ2mFxCIfVBx+gmSElyhdeNYuDxM+p/3LPrhxOrxYtNvm/jWB2+QVY H6LC3bMN+Ce3H69TjZnGTsxq2CvCDzBfd66Q1LPpsGZ38lk38F3GU0k= Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com (mail-wg0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a87.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6D6D426C05E for ; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:16:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wg0-f44.google.com with SMTP id dr13so3040830wgb.13 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:16:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.88.138 with SMTP id bg10mr33199629wib.13.1354169792207; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:16:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.192.207 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:16:31 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 00:16:31 -0600 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: "Rafiee, Hosnieh" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "tools-discuss@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] a RFC tool for writing draft X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 06:16:35 -0000 On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Rafiee, Hosnieh wrote: > I have created a web application that can be used to format a RFC. It can be > found at http://editor.rozanak.com. Just follow the directions for filling > in the data and then save it. A file will be created in text format that can > be uploaded to the IEFT database. It gives you the capability for further > editing and it can preview what you have created. I used it to create my > latest draft which I then submitted successfully. Give it a try and see what > you think. Hey, this is cool. We now have at least three GUI-ish I-D/RFC editing tools: yours, Stefan Santesson's NroffEdit, and LyX (with my lyx2rfc converter). Awesome! Now, I'm starting to see a need for distributed I-D authoring. Your editor doesn't allow for sharing of I-Ds by multiple users, right? You might want to add such a feature. Right now the only solutions for distributed I-D authoring is to use a distributed revision control system (e.g., git) and either plain nroff or XML with the xml2rfc schema. Note that there are no tools for merging nroff -- not that I could find in a brief search anyways. There are XML diff/merge tools, though I've not found any opensource ones (that's probably not a big deal though). Nico -- From cabo@tzi.org Thu Nov 29 00:32:44 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5772521F88DF for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 00:32:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.94 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.94 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.309, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A69dfG3a3Riy for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 00:32:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7475E21F88C8 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 00:32:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.224.120]) by informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id qAT8WUBc011057; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 09:32:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.200.12.5] (unknown [217.13.60.234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 10D56F2E; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 09:32:30 +0100 (CET) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 09:32:29 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <79800399-4698-4199-9D19-7F752B923667@tzi.org> References: To: Nico Williams X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: "Rafiee, Hosnieh" , "tools-discuss@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] a RFC tool for writing draft X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 08:32:44 -0000 git (or SVN, if you want to use the tools.ietf.org SVN infrastructure) = is quite good for the collaborative part, including merging that is = superior to most other ways of doing this. The toolchain you use with that could be XML2RFC (does anyone really use = nroff for this any more?*). You could also make use of one of the markdown-style toolchains (e.g., = the one written by Miek Gieben, or kramdown-rfc2629) if you like to = combine the convenience of plain-text input with the power of XML2RFC. Collaborating around a common editor tool is a non-starter, in my = experience. It is hard enough to get a set of authors to agree on a = common set of terms and editorial conventions. You won't be able to pry = emacs out of the hands of a real CS guy (or, say, vim, which is already = proving my point), and other people may be stuck with Notepad. Combining a strong version control and merge infrastructure (which we = already have) with maximum freedom in choice of the local tool each = editor uses, wins. Gr=FC=DFe, Carsten *) The main reason for using nroff was the plaintext look of the input = files. This strong requirement is now covered by kramdown-rfc2629 and = friends. From rafiee@hpi.uni-potsdam.de Thu Nov 29 00:38:45 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 942F121F89C5 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 00:38:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 98dvWINf0SqQ for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 00:38:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail3.hpi.uni-potsdam.de (mail3.hpi.uni-potsdam.de [IPv6:2001:638:807:204::8d59:e17b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B387421F89C3 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 00:38:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from owa2.hpi.uni-potsdam.de (owa2.hpi.uni-potsdam.de [141.89.225.162]) by mail3.hpi.uni-potsdam.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E81169E73; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 09:38:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from 8MXMA1R.hpi.uni-potsdam.de ([fe80::88e9:3d98:b35f:83bf]) by OWA2.hpi.uni-potsdam.de ([2002:8d59:e1a2::8d59:e1a2]) with mapi; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 09:38:42 +0100 From: "Rafiee, Hosnieh" To: Nico Williams Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 09:38:41 +0100 Thread-Topic: [Tools-discuss] a RFC tool for writing draft Thread-Index: Ac3N+RYvVCOdUXAkQ6yxl/sFsVMOoAAE7Afg Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, de-DE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "tools-discuss@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] a RFC tool for writing draft X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 08:38:45 -0000 RGVhciBOaWNvLA0KDQpJIGNhbiBhZGQgdGhhdCBmZWF0dXJlLCB0aGF0IGlzIG5vIHByb2JsZW0u IEl0IGlzIG5vdCBoYXJkIHRvIGFkZCBuZXcgZmVhdHVyZS4gVGhlIG1haW4gcHJvYmxlbSB3YXMg dGhlIGZvcm1hdHRpbmcgdGhhdCBJIHNvbHZlZCBpdCA6KS4NCg0KSSB3aWxsIHVwZGF0ZSBhbmQg aW5mb3JtIHlvdS4NCg0KSG9zbmllaA0KDQotLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJv bTogTmljbyBXaWxsaWFtcyBbbWFpbHRvOm5pY29AY3J5cHRvbmVjdG9yLmNvbV0gDQpTZW50OiBE b25uZXJzdGFnLCAyOS4gTm92ZW1iZXIgMjAxMiAwNzoxNw0KVG86IFJhZmllZSwgSG9zbmllaA0K Q2M6IHRvb2xzLWRpc2N1c3NAaWV0Zi5vcmcNClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbVG9vbHMtZGlzY3Vzc10g YSBSRkMgdG9vbCBmb3Igd3JpdGluZyBkcmFmdA0KDQpPbiBGcmksIE5vdiAyMywgMjAxMiBhdCAx MDoyMyBBTSwgUmFmaWVlLCBIb3NuaWVoIDxyYWZpZWVAaHBpLnVuaS1wb3RzZGFtLmRlPiB3cm90 ZToNCj4gSSBoYXZlIGNyZWF0ZWQgYSB3ZWIgYXBwbGljYXRpb24gdGhhdCBjYW4gYmUgdXNlZCB0 byBmb3JtYXQgYSBSRkMuIEl0IA0KPiBjYW4gYmUgZm91bmQgYXQgaHR0cDovL2VkaXRvci5yb3ph bmFrLmNvbS4gSnVzdCBmb2xsb3cgdGhlIGRpcmVjdGlvbnMgDQo+IGZvciBmaWxsaW5nIGluIHRo ZSBkYXRhIGFuZCB0aGVuIHNhdmUgaXQuIEEgZmlsZSB3aWxsIGJlIGNyZWF0ZWQgaW4gDQo+IHRl eHQgZm9ybWF0IHRoYXQgY2FuIGJlIHVwbG9hZGVkIHRvIHRoZSBJRUZUIGRhdGFiYXNlLiBJdCBn aXZlcyB5b3UgDQo+IHRoZSBjYXBhYmlsaXR5IGZvciBmdXJ0aGVyIGVkaXRpbmcgYW5kIGl0IGNh biBwcmV2aWV3IHdoYXQgeW91IGhhdmUgDQo+IGNyZWF0ZWQuIEkgdXNlZCBpdCB0byBjcmVhdGUg bXkgbGF0ZXN0IGRyYWZ0IHdoaWNoIEkgdGhlbiBzdWJtaXR0ZWQgDQo+IHN1Y2Nlc3NmdWxseS4g R2l2ZSBpdCBhIHRyeSBhbmQgc2VlIHdoYXQgeW91IHRoaW5rLg0KDQpIZXksIHRoaXMgaXMgY29v bC4gIFdlIG5vdyBoYXZlIGF0IGxlYXN0IHRocmVlIEdVSS1pc2ggSS1EL1JGQyBlZGl0aW5nDQp0 b29sczogeW91cnMsIFN0ZWZhbiBTYW50ZXNzb24ncyBOcm9mZkVkaXQsIGFuZCBMeVggKHdpdGgg bXkgbHl4MnJmYyBjb252ZXJ0ZXIpLiAgQXdlc29tZSENCg0KTm93LCBJJ20gc3RhcnRpbmcgdG8g c2VlIGEgbmVlZCBmb3IgZGlzdHJpYnV0ZWQgSS1EIGF1dGhvcmluZy4gIFlvdXIgZWRpdG9yIGRv ZXNuJ3QgYWxsb3cgZm9yIHNoYXJpbmcgb2YgSS1EcyBieSBtdWx0aXBsZSB1c2VycywgcmlnaHQ/ DQpZb3UgbWlnaHQgd2FudCB0byBhZGQgc3VjaCBhIGZlYXR1cmUuDQoNClJpZ2h0IG5vdyB0aGUg b25seSBzb2x1dGlvbnMgZm9yIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGVkIEktRCBhdXRob3JpbmcgaXMgdG8gdXNlIGEg ZGlzdHJpYnV0ZWQgcmV2aXNpb24gY29udHJvbCBzeXN0ZW0gKGUuZy4sIGdpdCkgYW5kIGVpdGhl ciBwbGFpbiBucm9mZiBvciBYTUwgd2l0aCB0aGUgeG1sMnJmYyBzY2hlbWEuICBOb3RlIHRoYXQg dGhlcmUgYXJlIG5vIHRvb2xzIGZvciBtZXJnaW5nIG5yb2ZmIC0tIG5vdCB0aGF0IEkgY291bGQg ZmluZCBpbiBhIGJyaWVmIHNlYXJjaCBhbnl3YXlzLg0KVGhlcmUgYXJlIFhNTCBkaWZmL21lcmdl IHRvb2xzLCB0aG91Z2ggSSd2ZSBub3QgZm91bmQgYW55IG9wZW5zb3VyY2Ugb25lcyAodGhhdCdz IHByb2JhYmx5IG5vdCBhIGJpZyBkZWFsIHRob3VnaCkuDQoNCk5pY28NCi0tDQo= From nico@cryptonector.com Thu Nov 29 02:14:18 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29CE921F8A0E for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 02:14:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ofyH45jthNtg for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 02:14:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from homiemail-a77.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcagg.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ABFF21F8A03 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 02:14:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from homiemail-a77.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a77.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D54429406E for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 02:14:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=jJ2Ya/p6uTOhE1EudngFFjf2VpY=; b=NbTdUr+x+w8 3/ht29c8fE9MGV7Ag2PwLFIufcZ/soJnODm1VlFZ32UwKvDKwJWzPeWdwfPOWF+w R7cT3MC5P1O30ooICe0lppZw5DOSDbV3iGKneJE7bdBfA0ypQg+H+OIIhmSlIyEl uQ8arX6j3rBUsJVR1qhSz8Iuf7HM5ArQ= Received: from mail-we0-f172.google.com (mail-we0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a77.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 88B419406B for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 02:14:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-we0-f172.google.com with SMTP id r3so4710656wey.31 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 02:14:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.97.137 with SMTP id ea9mr29591763wib.13.1354184055337; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 02:14:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.192.207 with HTTP; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 02:14:15 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <79800399-4698-4199-9D19-7F752B923667@tzi.org> References: <79800399-4698-4199-9D19-7F752B923667@tzi.org> Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 04:14:15 -0600 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: Carsten Bormann Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "Rafiee, Hosnieh" , "tools-discuss@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] a RFC tool for writing draft X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 10:14:18 -0000 On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote: > git (or SVN, if you want to use the tools.ietf.org SVN infrastructure) is= quite good for the collaborative part, including merging that is superior = to most other ways of doing this. Indeed (though I just can't get used to SVN, plus I find git superior to just about every other SCM I've ever used, and I've used a fair number). > The toolchain you use with that could be XML2RFC (does anyone really use = nroff for this any more?*). Yes, see Stefan Stantesson's NroffEdit: http://aaa-sec.com/nroffedit/index.= html > You could also make use of one of the markdown-style toolchains (e.g., th= e one written by Miek Gieben, or kramdown-rfc2629) if you like to combine t= he convenience of plain-text input with the power of XML2RFC. The main thing is that merging needs to be nice and easy. Merging XML (in the sense of two versions of a document, not in the sense of merging two documents into one) is a pain without XML-aware merge tools. Markdown is easier to merge, yes. > Collaborating around a common editor tool is a non-starter, in my experie= nce. It is hard enough to get a set of authors to agree on a common set of= terms and editorial conventions. You won't be able to pry emacs out of th= e hands of a real CS guy (or, say, vim, which is already proving my point),= and other people may be stuck with Notepad. I figure as much :( (Even with my lyx2rfc tool I still get annoyed at the lack of a vi mode in LyX.) > Combining a strong version control and merge infrastructure (which we alr= eady have) with maximum freedom in choice of the local tool each editor use= s, wins. That pretty much leaves nroff and markdown as choices of source format. > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > > *) The main reason for using nroff was the plaintext look of the input fi= les. This strong requirement is now covered by kramdown-rfc2629 and friend= s. I may have to look at those, yes. Thanks for pointing that out! Nico -- From mnot@mnot.net Thu Nov 29 15:54:56 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25EC721F8B1B for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:54:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.138 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.138 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.539, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LfSQ9hpEhtHQ for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:54:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 948ED21F8B23 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:54:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.75] (unknown [118.209.244.234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A90F2509B5 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 18:54:54 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Nottingham Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <0E58AEA9-3BDC-4988-9B90-74E07591A299@mnot.net> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 10:54:50 +1100 To: Tools discussion Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Subject: [Tools-discuss] Newly posted draft expired? X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 23:54:56 -0000 Hi, I just approved the publication of a WG -00, but it's showing up as expired: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2/ Any idea what's going on? Thanks, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ From henrik@levkowetz.com Thu Nov 29 16:35:30 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94C2521F8ADC for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:35:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pkqkGwxAB1PJ for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:35:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02CEC21F8ADB for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:35:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50876 helo=vigonier.lan ident=henrik) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_CAMELLIA_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TeEZb-0004y7-2K; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 01:35:19 +0100 Message-ID: <50B7FF46.1050705@levkowetz.com> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 01:35:18 +0100 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:10.0.11) Gecko/20121115 Thunderbird/10.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Nottingham References: <0E58AEA9-3BDC-4988-9B90-74E07591A299@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: <0E58AEA9-3BDC-4988-9B90-74E07591A299@mnot.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: mnot@mnot.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 Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Newly posted draft expired? X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 00:35:30 -0000 Hi Mark, On 2012-11-30 00:54 Mark Nottingham said the following: > Hi, > > I just approved the publication of a WG -00, but it's showing up as expired: > > http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2/ > > Any idea what's going on? One of the servers got it wrong -- could be that it had found the draft, but not received an updated list of active drafts yet. Fixed now, anyway. Best regards, Henrik From mnot@mnot.net Thu Nov 29 20:08:57 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D785F21F8453 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 20:08:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.307 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.307 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.708, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r7uoe-BF2WGE for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 20:08:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31D8321F8947 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 20:08:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.75] (unknown [118.209.244.234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3E3B4509B7; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 23:08:40 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <50B7FF46.1050705@levkowetz.com> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 15:08:35 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <00E7176D-2678-461E-8599-6C2ECBC684BA@mnot.net> References: <0E58AEA9-3BDC-4988-9B90-74E07591A299@mnot.net> <50B7FF46.1050705@levkowetz.com> To: Henrik Levkowetz X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: Tools discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Newly posted draft expired? X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 04:08:58 -0000 Thanks! On 30/11/2012, at 11:35 AM, Henrik Levkowetz = wrote: > Hi Mark, >=20 > On 2012-11-30 00:54 Mark Nottingham said the following: >> Hi, >>=20 >> I just approved the publication of a WG -00, but it's showing up as = expired: >>=20 >> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2/ >>=20 >> Any idea what's going on? >=20 > One of the servers got it wrong -- could be that it had found the = draft, > but not received an updated list of active drafts yet. Fixed now, = anyway. >=20 >=20 > Best regards, >=20 > Henrik >=20 -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/