From nobody Wed Feb 1 06:38:21 2017 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 2D14412946E for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 06:38:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.517 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.517 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=telekom.de Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ScUEIeDbLxRb for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 06:38:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailout33.telekom.de (MAILOUT33.telekom.de [80.149.113.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0E9C12945F for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 06:38:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telekom.de; i=@telekom.de; q=dns/txt; s=dtag1; t=1485959894; x=1517495894; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=1jIM7ml+iw/kwIJfQZX0Ml8V/IeU9+lgvge4OTlppLs=; b=ZBtd9l6+A/Ab5UBCuulpBo16VTva6ZvsYuztcHyfaAnDRoUq1SMoPN7G vbAK6DVVDetLfkfpG6FjGZvEjJziXybH27HpVYKh30LAIwFDw+HPXSkv7 MRQq7S5eL7Te2MREufNnNxbN9uJ7d+h8Rt1rrnMnU+MDao9zNhfjcTHxq LrNrP5GcsdOw7RT4cm72sKhQRL5E0u0k3ykeEOiVrSE/eRUsvkSHIUxU6 D7BVtOvQpk/9p2gmnGT+URK5cDQ6DlNB5QYAuynNZuRXH/1Hoh3o93GZK 19x8J+8ffE72XwGbctPYdn2uwlW1bU6JmAO7vV/s8zJ4bCy9WkRpPDxIM Q==; Received: from s4de8nsazdfe010.bmbg.telekom.de ([10.175.246.202]) by MAILOUT31.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA; 01 Feb 2017 15:38:11 +0100 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,320,1477954800"; d="scan'208,217";a="1072831629" Received: from he101655.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.226.17]) by q4de8nsa015.bmbg.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Feb 2017 15:36:36 +0100 Received: from HE101654.emea1.cds.t-internal.com (10.134.226.15) by HE101655.emea1.cds.t-internal.com (10.134.226.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1236.3; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:36:36 +0100 Received: from HE101654.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([fe80::c5be:f1ce:9ef6:7491]) by HE101654.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([fe80::c5be:f1ce:9ef6:7491%27]) with mapi id 15.00.1236.000; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:36:36 +0100 From: To: Thread-Topic: https is not enforced on http://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/ Thread-Index: AdJ8mJcQLUP2HJ8fSeadk/9YY5g9Ig== Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 14:36:36 +0000 Message-ID: <3ddb89b5cbb04cc0b3127368b1ef312e@HE101654.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.117.48.39] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_3ddb89b5cbb04cc0b3127368b1ef312eHE101654emea1cdstintern_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: [Tools-discuss] https is not enforced on http://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/ X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 14:38:20 -0000 --_000_3ddb89b5cbb04cc0b3127368b1ef312eHE101654emea1cdstintern_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, I suggest updating the https everywhere rules for ietf.org to include http:= //xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/ Please either add xml2rfc or amend the tools.ietf.org rule https://github.com/EFForg/https-everywhere/issues/8314 kind regards Axel Deutsche Telekom AG T-Labs (Research & Innovation) Dipl.-Inform. Axel Nennker Winterfeldtstr. 21, 10781 Berlin +491702275312 (Mobile) E-Mail: axel.nennker@telekom.de --_000_3ddb89b5cbb04cc0b3127368b1ef312eHE101654emea1cdstintern_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

 

I suggest updating the https everywhere rules for ie= tf.org to include http://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/
Please either add xml2rfc or amend the tools.ietf.org rule

https://github.com/EFForg/https-everywhere/issues/8314

 

kind regards

Axel

 

 

Deutsche Telekom AG

= T-Labs (Research & Innovation)
Dipl.-Inform. Axel Nennker
Winterfeldtstr. 21, 10781 Berlin
+491702275312 (Mobile)

E-Mail: axel.nennker@telekom.d= e

 

--_000_3ddb89b5cbb04cc0b3127368b1ef312eHE101654emea1cdstintern_-- From nobody Wed Feb 1 12:46:48 2017 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 A3D6D129525 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 12:46:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.399 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 07-gg0Zb3Rhd for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 12:46:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from alum-mailsec-scanner-8.mit.edu (alum-mailsec-scanner-8.mit.edu [18.7.68.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B89A129537 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 12:46:44 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: 12074414-773ff70000004a85-bb-5892492f15e5 Received: from outgoing-alum.mit.edu (OUTGOING-ALUM.MIT.EDU [18.7.68.33]) by alum-mailsec-scanner-8.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 9A.AF.19077.F2942985; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:46:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.110] (c-73-186-127-100.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [73.186.127.100]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as pkyzivat@ALUM.MIT.EDU) by outgoing-alum.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id v11KkcMU006707 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:46:39 -0500 To: tools-discuss@ietf.org From: Paul Kyzivat Message-ID: <5c1d5d69-47a2-162f-b66d-8afacbd10cfc@alum.mit.edu> Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:46:38 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrDIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixO6iqGvkOSnC4NI3HovtR+YyOjB6LFny kymAMYrLJiU1J7MstUjfLoEr4972DvaCf8wVD+5MZm1gXMDcxcjJISFgIjFx7mWWLkYuDiGB y4wSc68cAUsICXxmkvi5SxDEFhGQkpjWuIoFxGYT0JKYc+g/mC0sICYxr38GI4jNK2Av8fPU O7YuRg4OFgEViTW9tSCmqECaxKwbWhAVghInZz4B62QWMJOYt/khM4QtL7H97RzmCYw8s5CU zUJSNgtJ2QJG5lWMcok5pbm6uYmZOcWpybrFyYl5ealFuhZ6uZkleqkppZsYIQEjsoPxyEm5 Q4wCHIxKPLwZYpMihFgTy4orcw8xSnIwKYnyxj+YGCHEl5SfUpmRWJwRX1Sak1p8iFGCg1lJ hFfZHaicNyWxsiq1KB8mJc3BoiTO+22xup+QQHpiSWp2ampBahFMVoaDQ0mC9zBIo2BRanpq RVpmTglCmomDE2Q4D9DwI2DDiwsSc4sz0yHypxh1OU59uvCSSYglLz8vVUqcdwpIkQBIUUZp HtwcWKS/YhQHekuYV9sDqIoHmCTgJr0CWsIEtMT9VR/IkpJEhJRUA+Nc7tdz6kXzpr8QVFva FT1BNX2TkO7lRDczzufffF8LLbi5vyhJp/VeuvrlE0WWP6a/qPRtePibj1/m2MU288aqiEXL kiTm9gge+Xon7XxLpeQel/xvCzceL6m7dIbjZuTjNKWll36tbzMsMGtYX3fr8fYJfHIewk8O x5XJbEvc9XyG0PI3+muVWIozEg21mIuKEwEiAnymzwIAAA== Archived-At: Subject: [Tools-discuss] rfcdiff issue X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 20:46:45 -0000 I just ran into a problem with rfcdiff. I issued the following: https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-11.txt;uri1=rfc5226.txt But what I got back was the same as: https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-11.txt namely a diff between -10 and -11. Note I find this to be a sort of thing I want to do quite often: take a diff between a version of a document and an earlier version that is not just the prior version. Thanks, Paul From nobody Wed Feb 1 12:48:58 2017 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 755B6129537 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 12:48:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yp65SdgWstQe for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 12:48:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3357129431 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 12:48:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v11Kmj0l013048; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 21:48:45 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.217.124] (p5DC7E5A6.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.229.166]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3vDFbJ6Fk5z3YgX; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 21:48:44 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <5c1d5d69-47a2-162f-b66d-8afacbd10cfc@alum.mit.edu> Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 21:48:42 +0100 X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 507674922.279279-393bc1799dca094007ee0e9d919004ad Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1324D71D-349B-4EF3-909C-E9BBCB65EB86@tzi.org> References: <5c1d5d69-47a2-162f-b66d-8afacbd10cfc@alum.mit.edu> To: Paul Kyzivat X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) Archived-At: Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] rfcdiff issue X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 20:48:57 -0000 s/uri/url/ (Maybe the server should warn about unused query parameters.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > On 1 Feb 2017, at 21:46, Paul Kyzivat wrote: >=20 > I just ran into a problem with rfcdiff. I issued the following: >=20 > = https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-11.t= xt;uri1=3Drfc5226.txt >=20 > But what I got back was the same as: >=20 > = https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-11.t= xt >=20 > namely a diff between -10 and -11. >=20 > Note I find this to be a sort of thing I want to do quite often: take = a diff between a version of a document and an earlier version that is = not just the prior version. >=20 > Thanks, > Paul >=20 > --=20 > Tools-discuss mailing list > Tools-discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss >=20 > Please report datatracker.ietf.org bugs at = http://tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb > or send email to datatracker-project@ietf.org >=20 > Please report tools.ietf.org bugs at = http://tools.ietf.org/tools/issues or > send email to webmaster@tools.ietf.org >=20 From nobody Wed Feb 1 12:49:08 2017 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 0C2AF1299E9 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 12:49:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ewray8njPJu2 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 12:49:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (zinfandel.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:1890:126c::1:2a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCA851299E8 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 12:49:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-43-30.a357.priv.bahnhof.se ([79.136.43.30]:54885 helo=[192.168.1.120]) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1cZ1pr-0008Si-6Q; Wed, 01 Feb 2017 12:48:59 -0800 To: Paul Kyzivat , tools-discuss@ietf.org References: <5c1d5d69-47a2-162f-b66d-8afacbd10cfc@alum.mit.edu> From: Henrik Levkowetz Message-ID: <589249B3.8040602@levkowetz.com> Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 21:48:51 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5c1d5d69-47a2-162f-b66d-8afacbd10cfc@alum.mit.edu> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vHtjRF4CIRXnlIlqOWudSqbSab51WbNqL" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 79.136.43.30 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: tools-discuss@ietf.org, pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] rfcdiff issue X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 20:49:03 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --vHtjRF4CIRXnlIlqOWudSqbSab51WbNqL Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="5lN0iSFFCaBaxraCn0KDx6TTM3vhNEWS7"; protected-headers="v1" From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Paul Kyzivat , tools-discuss@ietf.org Message-ID: <589249B3.8040602@levkowetz.com> Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] rfcdiff issue References: <5c1d5d69-47a2-162f-b66d-8afacbd10cfc@alum.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <5c1d5d69-47a2-162f-b66d-8afacbd10cfc@alum.mit.edu> --5lN0iSFFCaBaxraCn0KDx6TTM3vhNEWS7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Paul, On 2017-02-01 21:46, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > I just ran into a problem with rfcdiff. I issued the following: >=20 > https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-1= 1.txt;uri1=3Drfc5226.txt >=20 > But what I got back was the same as: >=20 > https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-1= 1.txt >=20 > namely a diff between -10 and -11. >=20 > Note I find this to be a sort of thing I want to do quite often: take a= =20 > diff between a version of a document and an earlier version that is not= =20 > just the prior version. Right. I think there may be a typo at the bottom of this, you use uri1 as a key instead of url1. Maybe I should accept both? Best regards, Henrik --5lN0iSFFCaBaxraCn0KDx6TTM3vhNEWS7-- --vHtjRF4CIRXnlIlqOWudSqbSab51WbNqL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYkkmzAAoJEE6bV0uPuxcamj4QAMLEMDfAhoVCkucNwlLpqFNp gQrYBmNuVUJmMU8ojtYi9AGMJ/rL+RJh8yGBgwH4lmp9L6GaK8PRr7lB4f5vwODA BkFEk2qM9+8WoGD3sw3Mts9wAxap8CJpQmNfqiHA1k5PlO/lnrEiy5QTpGqRfOko dz9HmRHSFpdP4DgZBvIxc3YFQwesTzxK/kagY0lAZh1Ir+6h5VpUAW1dtec2lmw3 BKaZjeHcSvL1/6eKk0x/JG5sQ22lS6M/ZYy6OxL6YcsXpUkzpBuOn6yFqSM1V2rN uN2EpdZiUEqWw14pLAJM7Rvg7r0KEUCVh4Lv4TlR5xVpWYo8sA5Mo8qo2CSEUGIA sKshryw8DBs+QgzG96q7cmc0phfu7GaJmC1fxt1axaoY6LnNbkgxaOtnVkOEtuOC FZcU7nBX/LJogBxun7Qle4lw1N/XSgRfmm19c5GUNPIjjhMjHnDmaaQsTk5tM+60 XytRhlq6l2kIc9Xd/mRCCvLEFbsIMkGgGN6KNXmNyu+cLmmT21ZD4obaYYVtURGP iBU6vHz4/tmRggKFRO7FefewS9EwzgKvGPbGuGMCO9+8xprNzv4KcLj7oeHM8wk6 L+GcjX2V5+MpIJVQuije56Hgs79WIG6wW0VAQoDwd/pXbz1tp7htKKfOawjb4IEc IYmE39WjQKYOlqsZlAm8 =kvmE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vHtjRF4CIRXnlIlqOWudSqbSab51WbNqL-- From nobody Wed Feb 1 13:00:34 2017 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 7B7161299DC for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 13:00:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.934 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.934 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4uQJ6omiUQ2o for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 13:00:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from resqmta-po-03v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-po-03v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe16:19:96:114:154:162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55B80129550 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 13:00:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from resomta-po-01v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.225]) by resqmta-po-03v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id Z1ykcpCZKizphZ210cLEin; Wed, 01 Feb 2017 21:00:30 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.110] ([73.186.127.100]) by resomta-po-01v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id Z20zc5GzTZJysZ210cPZPX; Wed, 01 Feb 2017 21:00:30 +0000 To: Henrik Levkowetz , tools-discuss@ietf.org References: <5c1d5d69-47a2-162f-b66d-8afacbd10cfc@alum.mit.edu> <589249B3.8040602@levkowetz.com> From: Paul Kyzivat Message-ID: <1bfa9a00-8103-41ff-6b09-62f5950da362@alum.mit.edu> Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 16:00:29 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <589249B3.8040602@levkowetz.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfI8y3R0DBnXE1TQ4/0IayDjkARcx0nyCazRkodNqP//v9uOOI97Cc+R3P37FPhj8rZO5OCb5RLUf6KHO2yz+34tP+DAQuWVp/wLSQ3Nk+5PmPeFiQOyE DACoZ1+WBeEubRoBMhMuixnhvGoEYldxLXXodUQagZxwRuIjlztj3t/eH/O4ycy22A9FXybR6guYvvs+aGI3SqPkW9MrxihFgWQ= Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] rfcdiff issue X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 21:00:32 -0000 On 2/1/17 3:48 PM, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On 2017-02-01 21:46, Paul Kyzivat wrote: >> I just ran into a problem with rfcdiff. I issued the following: >> >> https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-11.txt;uri1=rfc5226.txt >> >> But what I got back was the same as: >> >> https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-11.txt >> >> namely a diff between -10 and -11. >> >> Note I find this to be a sort of thing I want to do quite often: take a >> diff between a version of a document and an earlier version that is not >> just the prior version. > > Right. I think there may be a typo at the bottom of this, you use uri1 > as a key instead of url1. > > Maybe I should accept both? Oh, duh! After correcting that it worked. I don't think you need to take both, but it would be really nice if you gave an error for unknown parameters! Normally when I do this I start by simply selecting the diff2 button from an HTMLized document, and then copy/paste the url2 param and edit it from 2 to 1 and fiddle with the version number. In this case I just typed in the parameter and obviously did it wrong. In my head "url" and "uri" are mostly interchangeable, so I didn't realize I was doing it wrong. Thanks, Paul From nobody Wed Feb 1 13:35:56 2017 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 55AAC12943D for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 13:35:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IHhrPwze58dD for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 13:35:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBE361293F0 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 13:35:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049295.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v11KtU6r009033 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:57:05 -0500 Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 28bn8w3qpm-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 01 Feb 2017 15:57:04 -0500 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v11Kv3ai014685 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:57:03 -0500 Received: from mlpi409.sfdc.sbc.com (mlpi409.sfdc.sbc.com [130.9.128.241]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v11KuuHQ014617 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:56:58 -0500 Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUBAB.ITServices.sbc.com (MISOUT7MSGHUBAB.itservices.sbc.com [130.9.129.146]) by mlpi409.sfdc.sbc.com (RSA Interceptor) for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 20:56:40 GMT Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSRCG.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.7.51]) by MISOUT7MSGHUBAB.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.9.129.146]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:56:39 -0500 From: "HANSEN, TONY L" To: "tools-discuss@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Tools-discuss] rfcdiff issue Thread-Index: AQHSfMxQzallkHNknkK2bLJ1yo+pMKFU82iA//+uXIA= Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 20:56:39 +0000 Message-ID: <8939BE89-24A6-4C7C-B3AD-9D1D1D928EDF@att.com> References: <5c1d5d69-47a2-162f-b66d-8afacbd10cfc@alum.mit.edu> <589249B3.8040602@levkowetz.com> In-Reply-To: <589249B3.8040602@levkowetz.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.110.240.64] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <2B2C44134DF7D742B279E178BD608CA4@LOCAL> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-02-01_15:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1612050000 definitions=main-1702010205 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] rfcdiff issue X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 21:35:55 -0000 SSB0aGluayB0aGVyZSBpcyBhbHNvIGFuIGlzc3VlIHdpdGggdXNpbmcg4oCcO+KAnSBpbnN0ZWFk IG9mIOKAnCbigJ0uDQoNCglUb255DQoNCk9uIDIvMS8xNywgMzo0OCBQTSwgIlRvb2xzLWRpc2N1 c3Mgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIEhlbnJpayBMZXZrb3dldHoiIDx0b29scy1kaXNjdXNzLWJvdW5jZXNA aWV0Zi5vcmcgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIGhlbnJpa0BsZXZrb3dldHouY29tPiB3cm90ZToNCg0KICAg IEhpIFBhdWwsDQogICAgDQogICAgT24gMjAxNy0wMi0wMSAyMTo0NiwgUGF1bCBLeXppdmF0IHdy b3RlOg0KICAgID4gSSBqdXN0IHJhbiBpbnRvIGEgcHJvYmxlbSB3aXRoIHJmY2RpZmYuIEkgaXNz dWVkIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmc6DQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+IGh0dHBzOi8vdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcv cmZjZGlmZj91cmwyPWRyYWZ0LWxlaWJhLWNvdHRvbi1pYW5hLTUyMjZiaXMtMTEudHh0O3VyaTE9 cmZjNTIyNi50eHQNCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gQnV0IHdoYXQgSSBnb3QgYmFjayB3YXMgdGhlIHNh bWUgYXM6DQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+IGh0dHBzOi8vdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcvcmZjZGlmZj91cmwy PWRyYWZ0LWxlaWJhLWNvdHRvbi1pYW5hLTUyMjZiaXMtMTEudHh0DQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+IG5h bWVseSBhIGRpZmYgYmV0d2VlbiAtMTAgYW5kIC0xMS4NCiAgICA+IA0KICAgID4gTm90ZSBJIGZp bmQgdGhpcyB0byBiZSBhIHNvcnQgb2YgdGhpbmcgSSB3YW50IHRvIGRvIHF1aXRlIG9mdGVuOiB0 YWtlIGEgDQogICAgPiBkaWZmIGJldHdlZW4gYSB2ZXJzaW9uIG9mIGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgYW5kIGFu IGVhcmxpZXIgdmVyc2lvbiB0aGF0IGlzIG5vdCANCiAgICA+IGp1c3QgdGhlIHByaW9yIHZlcnNp b24uDQogICAgDQogICAgUmlnaHQuICBJIHRoaW5rIHRoZXJlIG1heSBiZSBhIHR5cG8gYXQgdGhl IGJvdHRvbSBvZiB0aGlzLCB5b3UgdXNlIHVyaTENCiAgICBhcyBhIGtleSBpbnN0ZWFkIG9mIHVy bDEuDQogICAgDQogICAgTWF5YmUgSSBzaG91bGQgYWNjZXB0IGJvdGg/DQogICAgDQogICAgDQog ICAgQmVzdCByZWdhcmRzLA0KICAgIA0KICAgIAlIZW5yaWsNCiAgICANCiAgICANCiAgICANCg0K From nobody Wed Feb 1 15:27:02 2017 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 38D2F1295EB for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:27:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vg9FaTvvU0W8 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:26:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (zinfandel.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:1890:126c::1:2a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6666512959A for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:26:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-43-30.a357.priv.bahnhof.se ([79.136.43.30]:57803 helo=[192.168.1.120]) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1cZ4Ik-0003W6-R0; Wed, 01 Feb 2017 15:26:59 -0800 To: Paul Kyzivat , tools-discuss@ietf.org References: <5c1d5d69-47a2-162f-b66d-8afacbd10cfc@alum.mit.edu> <589249B3.8040602@levkowetz.com> <1bfa9a00-8103-41ff-6b09-62f5950da362@alum.mit.edu> From: Henrik Levkowetz Message-ID: <58926EBB.9040302@levkowetz.com> Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 00:26:51 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1bfa9a00-8103-41ff-6b09-62f5950da362@alum.mit.edu> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rbC76mX0oEIIMba0A8gwfiOsl5bRHVfvI" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 79.136.43.30 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: tools-discuss@ietf.org, pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] rfcdiff issue X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 23:27:00 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --rbC76mX0oEIIMba0A8gwfiOsl5bRHVfvI Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="SkKoCjADaGxMiwBx0mhOHmWHoLEfJtrqr"; protected-headers="v1" From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Paul Kyzivat , tools-discuss@ietf.org Message-ID: <58926EBB.9040302@levkowetz.com> Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] rfcdiff issue References: <5c1d5d69-47a2-162f-b66d-8afacbd10cfc@alum.mit.edu> <589249B3.8040602@levkowetz.com> <1bfa9a00-8103-41ff-6b09-62f5950da362@alum.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <1bfa9a00-8103-41ff-6b09-62f5950da362@alum.mit.edu> --SkKoCjADaGxMiwBx0mhOHmWHoLEfJtrqr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Paul, On 2017-02-01 22:00, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > I don't think you need to take both, but it would be really nice if you= =20 > gave an error for unknown parameters! Right. That should be fixed on the tools master server now, and will propagate to the other servers. Best regards, Henrik --SkKoCjADaGxMiwBx0mhOHmWHoLEfJtrqr-- --rbC76mX0oEIIMba0A8gwfiOsl5bRHVfvI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYkm67AAoJEE6bV0uPuxcaYHsP/0M4MZa48k6I+Tvcoft0P3Rp UdZ508ps83ltEDlqQk89T81ud6n8eg1ehL3j4nj1ba8O/zjxeU9I2wGLEal12FOF QOGylzC0J4ojtgn4MvLsMtLQV0BiuQJFvczbCa5bXNBBa414ycMaUwXSdeD03EGo IQiOueBFpglByEgUbhACrhsQbitwj7UrHuMZvyu6XkzOaMSXP/1YQBOJAgrDNwZD FwnlGhihfTnGAWeAm3TjfyZMgN1CzleMioVqx8D7b63qXwDEDpM4CL9d0KlC7tv+ Hx0tfYZ4sCgeXgMKWgkNyly2kDVsSIUNwXtli9V4jmzzjU2nsNPd2B9ZoYQE6n7w 4kDsOVwwVT9zFpWKOIgFGn8f0mE8ke3Icb+OxnvNKdBVi1fj0RcWBtPGGpmgO25u vxyesp6p7oXEUodiHYh3199Oxegvu+MJ+f8KuJ9KN5WEhtwU2YSDRwaWvFaDj5iI VfA0S2Vg/hqiNjac0r+nUMIe15uar1t70D8IKnyvZoH2b+/ojMiJQ8S2Z/Av64ej xVhzA8mSndU5BFeNsuuwsRYRqhfX//JvtJ0WLmtBtYahMpds7yEQCRuJ3f+txF+p JIGr9jDwOPK5lFNSHTxi9y52yNG7h7tQVaTWX6LM/ZZ8eRfrjOEd3d6kI+QnSfSp C4pOVn2D9/TAMgh5MN4c =IThM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rbC76mX0oEIIMba0A8gwfiOsl5bRHVfvI-- From nobody Mon Feb 6 20:03:49 2017 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 B991D1298CF for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 20:03:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.933 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.933 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ptxGZ4Z4BrR9 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 20:03:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from resqmta-po-04v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-po-04v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe16:19:96:114:154:163]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2FBB1298C6 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 20:03:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from resomta-po-07v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.231]) by resqmta-po-04v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id ax0McLzApxUJaax0McSBid; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 04:03:46 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com ([IPv6:2601:192:4603:9471:222:fbff:fe91:d396]) by resomta-po-07v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id ax0KcydSAxeYyax0LcbHhZ; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 04:03:46 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com (hobgoblin.ariadne.com [127.0.0.1]) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id v1743hUB002054 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 23:03:44 -0500 Received: (from worley@localhost) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id v1743hOB002051; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 23:03:43 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: hobgoblin.ariadne.com: worley set sender to worley@alum.mit.edu using -f From: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) To: tools-discuss@ietf.org Sender: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:03:43 -0500 Message-ID: <87bmue640w.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfILZQUmZERybIud/oDPAqGL/xxn9Gf+snAbYmJgGKfKXdk59t/E8aGtzReyxjQB6vz1KnA+RCVRSZQoeJ6Y8RA0NT4Q91Rou9U17TCsk2tBkzZxhvPgO W9ItIhXZZ4I6zux4bWfDFttqi21xXtThmghQjSMgTHJd4qB1tvcw8uLk Archived-At: Subject: [Tools-discuss] XML2RFC (online version): Appendixes X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 04:03:48 -0000 I'm trying to add an appendix to a draft I'm writing with XML2RFC. I'm using the online converter (http://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/) to process it. I am using what I think is the correct format: ... ... ... ...
...
... this is the part that matters ...
However, the appendix ("Implementing Load Balancing") is not numbered "Appendix A", and "" is rendered as "[exponential]" rather than "Appendix A". Is this intended? Is there a way to change it? Might I be using an incorrect "" processing instruction? Thanks for any help, Dale From nobody Mon Feb 6 22:35:35 2017 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 9BF4F1293F3 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 22:35:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.986 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.986 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1.887, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XP8im4P1_7PC for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 22:35:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C0F01270B4 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 22:35:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.120.54]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LzKQf-1cNZDQ2q4v-014XCD; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:35:17 +0100 To: "Dale R. Worley" , tools-discuss@ietf.org References: <87bmue640w.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <70a66635-389e-cea0-c9e7-80eda05dfffb@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:35:17 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87bmue640w.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:li1gv9RoIMi5w8uRd0iRpg+mSMJ8zNkJo2QSlkYTZ9NBvfaaVJm L4FC19NoglA3SiVAa8OUkT+L+0n6HvwEPWRUdvbAOGmndOCF21k2x0fDcofZ7kTu4hU/NjT 53BYsD8j+DqMkhMR2CAVaewmzaZPpy/xHv0Rz5Fid6enyLq6QRDokYZpgoyRHR/2Y1LpYyT sN/BzB4ljuQRBiDQJIYKQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:lsikd56YHLo=:/dNKAsZ7hjYMuWEEguPotM lrzdBrwXV9rTrf6uQWGXwTCuqWjoWAjqG+223nWVCbVKnuljvgb3ZXZjOoy1l6Npqu9vvHZX4 A09/u/HZBdqgdYFAQlvVgPWWhfxjTVCmDTOQnMxAVKtcyikoHXKAo7Vo1PS+FGy7sJndCRShU aOjbrCVp+HRvyyByvNTLgwk7f8FJ42tWL3SwfvL36TIf1rmDTc1LbYkBASW1biWVd+UXPct8c YV+NPFMbfTKPcG07Pq4LtxukG6lAqN0EMyLhCFkl2nRU6R8yGTc3RQ530mCZnecHaytxT0TJP ti+47DCsPWJH3nU54M5Odop4UL9CLGHNQHhzDK8ySv1GDmG5wk4gxM7rl5wMaW0g/RODKII+J p5SXTxVu58AmORMHaiCf/abcPT/Z974RVso009+DiPIFvgnBwIbL1XmfTp+rPF9pC20OCF6Jz mLFyvUk6fm7S9mE8FHadZtJ1QIH0jCzUgKnCig73N5uGrH7yI21Yi3G1mBzFqRDc6J6jqHFTo a5VN/CnykJUnSVt8L9jXBlAQNyTVNYPM5QoJg+xdnTOpYLW8v/Ug1SNG7KME3hkya0ECSaW8A lKoV87wi5dpFclKRX40zOkKIw1Fr2NEBGLIj1sFNUYIbYVFMznXeA/DcOu4RBK7OwW3G4rMdz JkC1jYf3b4krOmYcJfGNw8gyApWAC/IjV33raY139k2pqICVLvy5Vv0Jdm3ziqEYpKLvLYW9+ VSRC/H81Jg0h0/cEbclrUJvyjw4c5fWx9ma7T9SVN1fmQJCtzsxkr0P+ZpqJRDVqeZe88enNB 8ff+si3wq4/4IQ0Urg9BW+jh0YsBWStXXSdd5VoEAmfwZgrXA3M7pGsqDHL/PdQAB0JeOI6KX F5a+Adp+vDVlVacnK5WmHv8xdyjSgkgQLrX+WPN+stb71xPTl1AdU1CS3qVLzCL4DYbauoSF9 W7LABFcT8T/ZMxy6BiCf9jsJZpJmN2yYcXK4o3fE4YbYgBLhPsQDII5SrFzPY1R5p22Fh0+ZG gap8moLYe6OrQWnEBY2zO2Mhjbu5ozLuSUNEi2bYZQqLrBzXIbFIlI8TzHb08ByI4A== Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] XML2RFC (online version): Appendixes X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 06:35:34 -0000 On 2017-02-07 05:03, Dale R. Worley wrote: > I'm trying to add an appendix to a draft I'm writing with XML2RFC. I'm > using the online converter (http://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/) to process > it. I am using what I think is the correct format: > > > ... > > > ... > > > > > ... > > > ... > >
> ... >
>
> ... this is the part that matters ... >
>
>
> > However, the appendix ("Implementing Load Balancing") is not numbered > "Appendix A", and "" is rendered as > "[exponential]" rather than "Appendix A". > > Is this intended? Is there a way to change it? Might I be using an > incorrect "" processing instruction? > > Thanks for any help, > > Dale a) Note that @numbered is supposed to take true/false, not yes/no. The latter values are historic/experimental; don't use them. b) You can't have a section numbered when the predecessor is not numbered. This might be the reason why xml2rfc is confused. Best regards, Julian From nobody Tue Feb 7 03:59:15 2017 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 77076129545 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 03:59:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.933 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.933 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1S_oKbtRS7Dd for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 03:59:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from resqmta-po-11v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-po-11v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe16:19:96:114:154:170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A69DF129537 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 03:59:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from resomta-po-16v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.240]) by resqmta-po-11v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id b4QRcSkNi5l5Nb4QRcwDLp; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 11:59:11 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com ([IPv6:2601:192:4603:9471:222:fbff:fe91:d396]) by resomta-po-16v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id b4QPcmK2jZHQdb4QQcFG8W; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 11:59:11 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com (hobgoblin.ariadne.com [127.0.0.1]) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id v17Bx85E032751; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 06:59:08 -0500 Received: (from worley@localhost) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id v17Bx7kH032748; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 06:59:07 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: hobgoblin.ariadne.com: worley set sender to worley@alum.mit.edu using -f From: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) To: Julian Reschke In-Reply-To: <70a66635-389e-cea0-c9e7-80eda05dfffb@gmx.de> (julian.reschke@gmx.de) Sender: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 06:59:07 -0500 Message-ID: <878tpi5i0k.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfEBiVvRn+WEVoRamDQzqM50qykzedmzVYlWdp1yyt+O6hUcqSzWI/fRM4DwcOrfG641wS4k9wUIqEDYK56JYnd1DJYhxzx5jY6lVY68UekDd5q9jXv6X QTI83laoYzSfPOD85uCzUSD75PCHo+fZ79WaCjLVR9GX/Ix5NtFkZB0ltxNekAYIL6hVdCe+NFqU2YWF4YCNzHEXblkHIwZMo/s= Archived-At: Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] XML2RFC (online version): Appendixes X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 11:59:13 -0000 Julian Reschke writes: > a) Note that @numbered is supposed to take true/false, not yes/no. The > latter values are historic/experimental; don't use them. It's "historic", but that's what the online version requires. If I use "false", I get ERROR: Unable to validate the XML document: INPUT INPUT: Line 1327: Value "false" for attribute numbered of section is not among the enumerated set > b) You can't have a section numbered when the predecessor is not > numbered. This might be the reason why xml2rfc is confused. My understanding is that the expected order for the back matter is: References Acknowledgments Appendixes If the Acknowledgments section is unnumbered, then it seems that there is no way to get XML2RFC to number the Appendixes. What's the best way out of this dilemma? Dale From nobody Tue Feb 7 04:10:00 2017 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 056641294C2 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 04:09:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.986 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.986 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1.887, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BTCXnK1yPEhz for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 04:09:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8485012940A for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 04:09:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.123] ([5.10.171.186]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M2XkX-1cKEaz0ZgD-00sOv5; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 13:09:44 +0100 To: "Dale R. Worley" References: <878tpi5i0k.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 13:09:45 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <878tpi5i0k.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:sp4higGozvdsg5AbXWH3SrTzyfQkFIaW3/uXLpkp4NR+AvIfOQ+ iGkh4BWrBClIKk4K0xl8eS+rqoRgf1DODL1sKA66E8D1WQwJLWKcSrdKVhuZzW42sM/G8/I g6F7NzzZaaLbyT5gBAAPx/0u6OU/Fqrv9VETzvO6tCkkd8J6FYxf9L7fjysgj8GyVHsDV/P BUQtcoYDv9EEm/Wk0+t0A== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:jqkDcRxjSGA=:sjYTm53iIeEa2ESddzcGKs F7a70BtmmuAi5hR8417M7GMy8eR66UqX1Ghf4QrhOHnNJkxahFscloUQsr0OL5PrQkSwXdIsB nsyic66S69spTqWsOTd5B+XVFhmB4RKslZ25xe9iwzw7NzPsc1UN0RGL1DhDePMtfZ4v6IEgi aZMILnbYb6q6QlW+V8ixc/rldPx7lZgWqBJ/9UPYEJkwnQxRBnu/tqk/kllT5Fo+xm9V10WE2 Kzxd2JZDAxFOMsKBKb8Uqek3y2qlyQNYMifcZ1wReZi+I29uCEt95r/e7tXpEn3/hm1Pu6fPS PkfsgUlcN9fdzZMqGjFva7m2oG5AuiL41EnxfAfyPFlWn1hvB7s3Po+rrnIl7emf6tEN+USCs fvLuRFEOWr7JRtEopdFkY6MXk8RpV/4EDix54l9Bb2ZaNXc1MyBUs8XtTZ4C3FpcopqRcyFsN J6dOruMpfdFYqhMPnnA9rD/Boo3Vy7Hin1qlbd0Es6f7B8hZYnlBp7Aowph20P1jEcy7/ErPH EvP3IqlF7PVLrSvlHco385Y1Q9QAQzKOf1WJVU9N39s4sZVKae8T3pfaiqkVXh0HidJ7DsdZN tVDC/ESrzQ6LK51UZ/0eNJfyBwPpQHcb4C9ZOBZJMJn4FlpF0hxTtt56ok1gjGspIQYzjpqLb qHg2oC1McZa8vPY85WG5mWOki9zQ69kShgVVvIvO7kBaXTTjBbD6NnPgCDjrFOGx9UhJC9rYm H/1xhtlY+fEuFW0hp2Dy1gs4cuduEKwk1YiuEbr7tLVO/QySwQOi94NZUH2jdzFwK44xhQMix qTA4JcT Archived-At: Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] XML2RFC (online version): Appendixes X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:09:59 -0000 On 2017-02-07 12:59, Dale R. Worley wrote: > Julian Reschke writes: >> a) Note that @numbered is supposed to take true/false, not yes/no. The >> latter values are historic/experimental; don't use them. > > It's "historic", but that's what the online version requires. If I use > "false", I get > > ERROR: Unable to validate the XML document: INPUT > INPUT: Line 1327: Value "false" for attribute numbered of section is not among the enumerated set That has been fixed quite some time ago: https://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc/trac/changeset/2247 -- maybe the online version needs an update. >> b) You can't have a section numbered when the predecessor is not >> numbered. This might be the reason why xml2rfc is confused. > > My understanding is that the expected order for the back matter is: > > References > Acknowledgments > Appendixes > > If the Acknowledgments section is unnumbered, then it seems that there > is no way to get XML2RFC to number the Appendixes. > > What's the best way out of this dilemma? Put the Acknowledgments last, or keep them numbered. Best regards, Julian From nobody Tue Feb 7 07:05:38 2017 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 E108D129C8D; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:05:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tA0YRqPg1Atf; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:05:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01137129C84; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:05:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5471AE1DA; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:26:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7918E636BB; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:05:33 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Richardson To: ietf-action@ietf.org X-Attribution: mcr X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:05:33 -0500 Message-ID: <29249.1486479933@obiwan.sandelman.ca> Archived-At: Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: [Tools-discuss] ietf.webex.com seems to have gotten deleted X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 15:05:37 -0000 This webex instance seems to have gone away. obiwan-[life/taxes/2016](2.2.1) mcr 10183 %dig @8.8.8.8 ietf.webex.com a ; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-12.1-Debian <<>> @8.8.8.8 ietf.webex.com a ; (1 server found) ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 61333 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 512 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;ietf.webex.com. IN A ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: webex.com. 16 IN SOA ns1.as13445.net. csg-dnsad= min.cisco.com. 2013170020 300 900 604800 120 ;; Query time: 13 msec ;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8) ;; WHEN: Tue Feb 07 10:04:54 EST 2017 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 113 mcr has logged on pts/14 from :0.0. mcr has logged on pts/15 from :0.0. obiwan-[life/taxes/2016](2.2.1) mcr 10184 %dig @8.8.8.8 ietf.webex.com aaa= a ; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-12.1-Debian <<>> @8.8.8.8 ietf.webex.com aaaa ; (1 server found) ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 40287 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 512 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;ietf.webex.com. IN AAAA ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: webex.com. 119 IN SOA ns1.as13445.net. csg-dnsad= min.cisco.com. 2013170020 300 900 604800 120 ;; Query time: 64 msec ;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8) ;; WHEN: Tue Feb 07 10:04:58 EST 2017 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 113 -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networ= ks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architec= t [ ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails = [ From nobody Tue Feb 7 07:26:53 2017 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 95772129CB5 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:26:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.933 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.933 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YMdC2qFvuDEP for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:26:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from resqmta-po-04v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-po-04v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe16:19:96:114:154:163]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FFD5129CB2 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:26:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from resomta-po-19v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.243]) by resqmta-po-04v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id b7eQcMbkNxUJab7fNcTByK; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 15:26:49 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com ([IPv6:2601:192:4603:9471:222:fbff:fe91:d396]) by resomta-po-19v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id b7fLctsjJc52eb7fMcEIPG; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 15:26:48 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com (hobgoblin.ariadne.com [127.0.0.1]) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id v17FQkvP011765; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:26:46 -0500 Received: (from worley@localhost) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id v17FQkDS011762; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:26:46 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: hobgoblin.ariadne.com: worley set sender to worley@alum.mit.edu using -f From: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) To: Julian Reschke In-Reply-To: (julian.reschke@gmx.de) Sender: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:26:45 -0500 Message-ID: <87wpd23tu2.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfHUHSxk9I6TJ/QLa88e1pdHrKqENaNh2C55kvZ3nO7iUBNBIB4w3tNxh4v2duPZB8LFFXcQ2ds0zTIJN47sohSL8fImz7NHzCB8nX0Z0PjLB5R1sS1DB ZJJOMooo16T7Zxn/NHwhzUsnZ5irtDww5MXq/T4/hZ/ppGqU8vUiQRd3j44cliJqm0LMFawAqRaoDgwUKOOfUZj6K4PG8OHCNaU= Archived-At: Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] XML2RFC (online version): Appendixes X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 15:26:51 -0000 Julian Reschke writes: >> My understanding is that the expected order for the back matter is: >> >> References >> Acknowledgments >> Appendixes >> >> If the Acknowledgments section is unnumbered, then it seems that there >> is no way to get XML2RFC to number the Appendixes. >> >> What's the best way out of this dilemma? > > Put the Acknowledgments last, or keep them numbered. And indeed, putting the Acknowledgments last has been the style, at least since RFC 8000. Thanks for correcting me on that! Dale From nobody Tue Feb 7 11:33:13 2017 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 DFF81129E4D for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 11:33:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yt9EHWMeVkpv for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 11:33:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr0-x232.google.com (mail-wr0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D55EA129E4A for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 11:33:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr0-x232.google.com with SMTP id k90so44178648wrc.3 for ; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 11:33:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=0W3FXX/9QLe34Bm0gf4XXZv+mrzPKvZnY8IzXQaID40=; b=uq4bXo4wknF20FVAqfu7GTV7Z1fVcw9s0KKj1EZWB8RJhV+KjcU9cZvaMItznT8gv1 eAaA+eDth656ZuKxzRphCzUWTVSAvoCD6ayPgp6yBN+ZNjYsiMH3JHpJaEpUC9+OWSLO c9x2dEOBzwXSofX5dXm1ZzEY3TjyRPwta8ZbM1qLaJ/yc3lUbBCWcaF6JvztsXv8j0pg o/yJ9IBHdwC00PFExjjFdv0UPIMSyPwpalUr+1RNzFbiJ2MrMRkddWO8Qdzz1i76CuMS cGAs4D25m5IIxyHOrvGEjvoviiLemDIF+FvF+PhTGCOjRjRgMAy46zt0ToFB6WcBtlOt F/EQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=0W3FXX/9QLe34Bm0gf4XXZv+mrzPKvZnY8IzXQaID40=; b=mVBJdkz3NzRNTYupxOqA2oTHflGuiRsx/OYp3vmcPwsh2Q/pRGNtRZSVhxPJpkl6u9 f3GmR6tZ65OimrjwNgRcyhXogX5eZupjHOcjWmIjfJj1e3BFjr4Czvcxggl1s7Nowac4 3dzGPlMpQs4rXgYDWfPQcCRLNMDnULHSOKL32EPseV2fTwL05hexE/O2+foH/1x/AN5y jKFwj+lqU1jPBl/3ncLnIzh1FZ+UY3uZfWg+3OyDUxYT0+NMi+DrT/EMQHx5GeqjXKxM 3LEKzJ5x7iVWIIS3ptat2kbS744EPp4zzVWjp2YNjUq0JF0GxBIXxjELPtmarnSxDdf/ neeg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nNddInFVHlv4Qs7fleUP4B+cyzZSkOND8DP3YcrKOi6sD94ZRbxXTpV4HOcnXik9Uc4DG+YnwzAY4yrQ== X-Received: by 10.223.164.151 with SMTP id g23mr16069176wrb.86.1486495986051; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 11:33:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.142.108 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 11:33:05 -0800 (PST) From: Alia Atlas Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 14:33:05 -0500 Message-ID: To: tools-discuss@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f403045f15083575650547f5d131 Archived-At: Subject: [Tools-discuss] tools forum idea for IETF 98 X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 19:33:11 -0000 --f403045f15083575650547f5d131 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Last IETF, Robert and I chatted with a few folks at breakfast about this idea. This mail is trying to pull the idea together, if there is enough interest in active participation, while there is time to figure out scheduling for IETF 98. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Alia Atlas Date: Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 2:30 PM Subject: tools forum idea for IETF 98 To: IETF Discussion Mailing List There have been some discussions about having a meeting at IETF 98 to discuss existing experimental tools and encourage discussion among those working on tools to handle specific issues. The basic meeting description is Tools are a critical mechanism through which IETF work can be done with less effort. Some IETF tools (e.g. datatracker, xml2rfc, etc.) are at a high level of maturity and deployment. Many other tools have either not yet reached a maturity suitable for wide-spread use or struggle to spread knowledge of their existence and use. Still other potential tools are merely partially brainstormed ideas looking for others motivated to discuss, implement and try. This meeting provides a mechanism to spread knowledge of experimental tools to those interested and get feedback on those tools. It also provides time and focus for finding others interested in particular tool ideas and discussing how to progress them. It should be augmented before IETF 98 with a wiki of experimental tool pointers and tool ideas. Agenda: 30 minutes of new tools lightning talks 60 minutes of small group discussion on different tool areas If you would be interested in doing a lightning talk for a tool which hasn't gained IETF-wide use, please let us know in the next week. If you would be interested in facilitating discussion for a particular tool area, please let us know in the next week. If you are interested in suggesting a tool area for discussion and want to be involved in that, please let us know. Once we understand what the interest level is in active participation, then we can figure out how is best to organize this. Thanks, Alia Atlas & Robert Sparks --f403045f15083575650547f5d131 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Last IETF, Robert and I chatted with a few folks at b= reakfast about this idea.
This mail is trying to pull the idea to= gether, if there is enough interest in active participation, while there is= time to figure out scheduling for IETF 98.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Feb 7= , 2017 at 2:30 PM
Subject: tools forum idea for IETF 98
To: IETF Disc= ussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org&= gt;


There have = been some discussions about having a meeting at IETF 98 to discuss existing= experimental tools and encourage discussion among those working on tools t= o handle specific issues.=C2=A0 The basic meeting description is=C2=A0

Tools are a critical mechanism through which IETF work can be d= one with less effort.=C2=A0 Some IETF tools (e.g. datatracker, xml2rfc, etc= .) are at a high level of maturity and deployment.=C2=A0 Many other tools h= ave either not yet reached a maturity suitable for wide-spread use or strug= gle to spread knowledge of their existence and use. =C2=A0 Still other pote= ntial tools are merely partially brainstormed ideas looking for others moti= vated to discuss, implement and try.=C2=A0 This meeting provides a mechanis= m to spread knowledge of experimental tools to those interested and get fee= dback on those tools.=C2=A0 It also provides time and focus for finding oth= ers interested in particular tool ideas and discussing how to progress them= . =C2=A0 It should be augmented before IETF 98 with a wiki of experimental = tool pointers and tool ideas.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Agenda: =C2=A030 minutes of new tools lightning talks<= /div>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 60 minutes of s= mall group discussion on different tool areas

If you would be intereste= d in doing a lightning talk for a tool which hasn't gained IETF-wide us= e, please let us know in the next week.

If you would be interested in f= acilitating discussion for a particular tool area, please let us know in th= e next week.=C2=A0 If you are interested in suggesting a tool area for disc= ussion and want to be involved in that, please let us know.

Once we und= erstand what the interest level is in active participation, then we can fig= ure out how is best to organize this.
=
Thanks,
Alia Atlas & Robert Sparks

--f403045f15083575650547f5d131-- From nobody Sun Feb 12 17:44:25 2017 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 AEBA01294B2 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:44:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.934 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.934 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g7l4SL5C-YiV for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:44:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from resqmta-ch2-12v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-12v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 159E312945F for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:44:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from resomta-ch2-17v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.113]) by resqmta-ch2-12v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id d5gacB4Xo6RInd5glcYXMP; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 01:44:23 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com ([IPv6:2601:192:4603:9471:222:fbff:fe91:d396]) by resomta-ch2-17v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id d5gkcR4wSSQcPd5gkcx72j; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 01:44:23 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com (hobgoblin.ariadne.com [127.0.0.1]) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id v1D1iL1g024137 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 20:44:21 -0500 Received: (from worley@localhost) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id v1D1iLa8024134; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 20:44:21 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: hobgoblin.ariadne.com: worley set sender to worley@alum.mit.edu using -f From: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) To: tools-discuss@ietf.org Sender: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 20:44:21 -0500 Message-ID: <87fujix3t6.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfPNsGlDzExhmIf9S6wLMcwHID8rXHNpC6BBddgAD6wMeHOxOipmis2DcK+8QanIOaSBT7f2imWkegLYcJVInAf2wn7xV5+UJAGPFkRrEEowzQXe/Npkd ROhdpT6nzNws6A+y5Kieowy8ZIeUmbaa8+UqPmlB94AiBiovrsTaQJp4 Archived-At: Subject: [Tools-discuss] Line wrapping in the review tool X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 01:44:24 -0000 I reviewed the draft draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids-04 for Gen-Art. I used the review tool to upload the review (a text file). Today, I'm answering the author's response to the review. I notice that his mail program has wrapped some of the lines in the review in inconvenient places, making them hard to read. However, due to an ambiguity, I went back to the original review to check something. Or rather, I went back to the copy that had been sent out on the gen-art mailing list. And what do I see, but that for some unbelievable reason, the upload process has *broken some of the lines*, despite that the only one over 80 characters is the one containing a URL for the IETF mail archive. What gives here? I don't want to express what I'm truly feeling, but I do find the mutilation of my review to be quite counterproductive to communication and I'd like to know how to stop it. Dale From nobody Mon Feb 13 02:20:37 2017 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 08D20129596 for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 02:20:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iola-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m6nk3OItwdqi for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 02:20:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qk0-x231.google.com (mail-qk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A3A6129595 for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 02:20:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk0-x231.google.com with SMTP id s140so89391093qke.0 for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 02:20:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iola-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=JuZ5YX0IUmo21bk9uRtQJhi/3GMyDtKgQWWtQMGtYmk=; b=uRSu8fMRyJowPSATglm4reSG/ibhvl9p1vPH/pi2ZKtmGAmx5hMBh9nlNgdRlOsx0x SEQEurfoDdeeR94cCpGRRoSerbKxuaclETIIcCC0b/aUFqhFDZqGFL6ggTfWhdTqUbZO fwQkSLVeWFwEM0kYNE9bTIY1UABpffPladWcdyp/Ftu+WE+ZervfLyQh8rkvPnLgIhTg o2OjUIZsNsj7OTKSaMzLWTZjBPTaQ+ek7ZMZWRG003gdKMX+G4Gl24siad2hi+YxBSyG v7Bgl+gpi/WCnU92e87cfig1e/EeJBfMrDzW2u+BgDqs5i4MnF0u5438OwpuMwuM6WLq 5rKw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JuZ5YX0IUmo21bk9uRtQJhi/3GMyDtKgQWWtQMGtYmk=; b=ukBHVeUnyvnmjtbydGJSeA4xqycu6VwtPkFOCF5EYUuc0lV+VFVSXdnFwy/sle6uxT uLpFtj9ZY4hx5Tmx+zHAI7vNYypaSgd9bs1FZxNU+ZCgTJQLxQ+rB8f93iPTBnS3chpK FvxrgDfsP54qE52igsDDglOkEOmo2E8SqT0lLDA14DviRRTYsdPNqkSqVxJVk0NwgTLU wXQFlPd5blyJ2eV9Y6hnV19rC2eA8wC1GdbcS2FJPjZMlen7hj04l7uYW33cdnuHCJDU stxQGuMWxc5A/agL0QkAfIpyKYxXCkRkm4/zUuYLnlCRaHefFx+B+OzjfESd79ZfIwXp qE+A== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lPuVKIzEjW2wvPWS7sc2p70zsMRpDLHPjfztF6obhfVvPwNjPLd4jvvlmb74+pu/pQKXYihO33ROducA== X-Received: by 10.55.21.66 with SMTP id f63mr9350929qkh.296.1486981234422; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 02:20:34 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.138.23 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 02:20:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87fujix3t6.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> References: <87fujix3t6.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> From: Ole Laursen Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 11:20:14 +0100 Message-ID: To: "Dale R. Worley" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: Tools Team Discussion Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Line wrapping in the review tool X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 10:20:37 -0000 2017-02-13 2:44 GMT+01:00 Dale R. Worley : > What gives here? I don't want to express what I'm truly feeling, but I > do find the mutilation of my review to be quite counterproductive to > communication and I'd like to know how to stop it. Hi, I'm afraid it's my fault. The code that sends the review to the mailing list does an automatic word-wrap at 70 characters which also accidentally includes the content of the review. That was not intentional. I'll send a patch to have this fixed. Ole From nobody Mon Feb 13 07:29:38 2017 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 A96851296BE for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 07:29:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.933 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.933 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RZDNDRtW84iT for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 07:29:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A85EC1296CE for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 07:29:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from resomta-ch2-17v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.113]) by resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id dIYfcRpRG7NeDdIZMcN8AN; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 15:29:36 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com ([IPv6:2601:192:4603:9471:222:fbff:fe91:d396]) by resomta-ch2-17v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id dIZJcTFtsSQcPdIZKcy3dK; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 15:29:35 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com (hobgoblin.ariadne.com [127.0.0.1]) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id v1DFTXQj009092; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 10:29:33 -0500 Received: (from worley@localhost) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id v1DFTWQr009089; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 10:29:32 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: hobgoblin.ariadne.com: worley set sender to worley@alum.mit.edu using -f From: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) To: Ole Laursen In-Reply-To: (olau@iola.dk) Sender: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 10:29:32 -0500 Message-ID: <8760kew1lv.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfN7TRIBP8Ou+w97cHHh6pJf5Nc+Alea3JYyKkHb/ykhqscp4fqjVaaJsj47WSR7bdbRVFGE+A7ae2u6cLk1jhnhcO37Kt0uu+MvYvn8DeyOG8yAHOt8H 2ZjMmGD02vymTXtm98tn/58soDaPzdttJaeH8GtW3rs8E3ZDf89Hl9KUZcQhPlAJ3OVjEas6sVQH6g== Archived-At: Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Line wrapping in the review tool X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 15:29:38 -0000 Ole Laursen writes: > I'm afraid it's my fault. The code that sends the review to the > mailing list does an automatic word-wrap at 70 characters which also > accidentally includes the content of the review. That was not > intentional. Ah, OK. I wanted to check; the other plausible explanation was that it's policy to wrap in a certain way. If that was the case, I'd adjust how I format my reviews. Dale From nobody Tue Feb 14 06:04:18 2017 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 57684129661 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 06:04:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wh0kscsXCnz3 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 06:04:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 050411294AE for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 06:04:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 204032009E for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 09:25:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F0A26381A for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 09:04:11 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Richardson To: tools-discuss X-Attribution: mcr X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Archived-At: Subject: [Tools-discuss] webex/webrtc X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 14:04:17 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain The ietf.webex.com instance went away last week mysteriously. I'm guessing because it was donation, it got "cleaned up". (And a few months ago the certificate went invalid) The webrtc interface to webex seems to have gone away. It had improved: you could now lead a meeting with it. But, it's gone again, I don't know if it's just me, or what. Given this situation, I'd like to ask for some clarity: - what's the plan? - when are we going to return to dogfood? - since we have no clear SLA, maybe we should just do our own thing? (JITSI?) -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEbsyLEzg/qUTA43uogItw+93Q3WUFAlijDloACgkQgItw+93Q 3WVgVggAlyFrniMmqsqnjS0y8Edu7bO0ZP1ClOwCWTo30e9kuaVrVP6HVa1yPQjE 7NTQ+wpVWF5X1lGmd/Bxe+W5EgFC1P9Nj1PAwINi0KkkQn70Vz06VC23VRNw0Fa6 KQcPdyIDHCrjEduosHTRJ0BqO0eA3l/cGPzO5UotjCBg9ep4h44v9tYT0wQCAOeU ocd4YPhNrz2edjKTAKqeDFA83EEFhU3iEMjrUTBxjLr22o3/AFDBUhQAd1WMdil3 dJsI+XlFHG3m4MtFOQeFl4xulxQTt7/axbsqquKsg3xMU6GZXXVpsYL02QoTVwgE XJGXbilyLEzeVOd30k6+XOjdYrKmLA== =VM6T -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From nobody Tue Feb 14 07:06:03 2017 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 99AB6129590 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 07:06:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X-Gr34ihkmtS for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 07:06:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com (mail-qk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C6D71294FA for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 07:06:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id 11so124349848qkl.3 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 07:06:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=7jfBIvIxM8rhmCY5rmit5h/RPaZO3cH6BgjZmwSNj0I=; b=ZGbtDw/vrGU0dqvfXpkkOu0XSdajE1x1bxycwgEcX/Qk4iX99H9NLsvkQPpUCQXmep wSFCqmN6ANjA14v0Q2Q2qqH6n3RpYVBe2+rTFTwXldxZa5GHW3HMD0AjUJ6bZXrR+Q4o Z6YOiXTlZ75G47eNuKn2tHJ0A7Ib7pEYxCRc7jgNrznCRlMMsIYPXmep+Kfnj5NgvVcG ZEUVCHE5R4moyCF6/4ilBHgXVOlVBkg54HqFLV0o0J/gDpUwv18jtnnIwAiKpSlyuk8H Tf6b5GpvPVps653UtXQ3lR7gMxqZIgWGkGqw7aom/6fVWa5Syj6jPDX6JAPlMmFiQWDG kEsA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=7jfBIvIxM8rhmCY5rmit5h/RPaZO3cH6BgjZmwSNj0I=; b=qI5UYeCuvLenfD1aO8YW6Se1C0h+KPWK6JQToKaUwgUQoLFsvFVNW0tMrJ+xwnIlxC SArya3OkOXide5j2kDuzAEPslA/UmNUTTaJTswROgl04nvLd8jwnl1ocevVFUrBTzB0Q XE6h4gASxfh9c+oVI6qs2dZuPprjp4EOmkIqzOCUDdDx5BXxsgh2TzHSXGWgNNf+bNdx 6sl1XtAGInpcJNlbTybhS0fhcZ0vOnO3dY7aur6Yr1NjPzaaCpVk6KJqveex7+G5vHvu w/LqwtQknYANgLvYc8XTD0vEIrNtJWId+lCs2xNkviL0gimkOnPoUbVam/XH7WH9eQxp AXhg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39klyDbOpAGMvLBONdpJvpbRSvZFSTJ3dcDLXbtJ1tI6axJDHi0DiAKQcsxonSeqaA== X-Received: by 10.55.181.1 with SMTP id e1mr362675qkf.122.1487084759303; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 07:05:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.228] (c-73-167-64-188.hsd1.nh.comcast.net. [73.167.64.188]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c41sm474074qtd.3.2017.02.14.07.05.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Feb 2017 07:05:57 -0800 (PST) From: Ted Lemon Message-Id: <9A249B84-E693-4273-9688-0CD7AB26D5F2@fugue.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FD5A4B7C-3F7D-468D-9B47-D0EAB1A3DBF5" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:05:56 -0500 In-Reply-To: <25691.1487081051@obiwan.sandelman.ca> To: Michael Richardson References: <25691.1487081051@obiwan.sandelman.ca> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) Archived-At: Cc: tools-discuss Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] webex/webrtc X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 15:06:01 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_FD5A4B7C-3F7D-468D-9B47-D0EAB1A3DBF5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Feb 14, 2017, at 9:04 AM, Michael Richardson = wrote: > - since we have no clear SLA, maybe we should just > do our own thing? (JITSI?) This seems straightforwardly obvious. The only obstacle is that some = corporate firewalls seem to prevent people from using it. --Apple-Mail=_FD5A4B7C-3F7D-468D-9B47-D0EAB1A3DBF5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii On Feb 14, 2017, at 9:04 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
     - since we have no clear SLA, = maybe we should just
     do our own = thing? (JITSI?)

This = seems straightforwardly obvious.   The only obstacle is that some = corporate firewalls seem to prevent people from using it.

= --Apple-Mail=_FD5A4B7C-3F7D-468D-9B47-D0EAB1A3DBF5-- From nobody Tue Feb 14 10:39:43 2017 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 18C8E1296E7 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:39:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KpK5EhN2Di0h for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:39:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 543A6129A95 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:32:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8E17200A3 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 13:53:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 163156381A for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 13:32:03 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Richardson To: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Attribution: mcr X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Archived-At: Subject: [Tools-discuss] xml2rfc --- no more xml.resource.org X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 18:39:42 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain I thought that we were going to remove xml.resource.org from the list of hosts that xml2rfc will search for? because the certificates are wrong, and it is confusing if you typo a resource and them get a certificate error when xml2rfc.tools* won't answer. I've got 2.5.2 installed... maybe I've missed an update (via pip)? requests.exceptions.SSLError: hostname 'xml.resource.org' doesn't match either of '*.ietf.org', 'ietf.org' I edited my local copy to remove xml.resource.org, and then I found out which ID I had typo'ed. -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEbsyLEzg/qUTA43uogItw+93Q3WUFAlijTSIACgkQgItw+93Q 3WUZkAgArochGRfaWZl5VV76ARw0JNdQSm1+ZvqpLLMjV0+sRJ9hjNokD4f9eN0s +5tqqRccElTrSyb+VHJ8gb1ipUh/EN9ka6vipONvit8FMLWQj6gpvUIP7zQ2pTW8 z8S6Qw7s0YJBkJHhrAqu5T+qKyN74ufk7J+TwVXGzOk9uhgATOOnS+EYRQfYwCrr gbowvgDhh1HCYf/BMj2Ty+fbh2Wc/KLKJbdA8vY3PTKR4Lbr0kMFLz82n9jj5y2Z NZTA7ELGxI0gcCR039Gf6/05Qp3FvAsE2N6bNwCryROtGUxRgQYlCmp0dhpUBNyP tRmlBNdG1Ol3JAW/9vpysYduXJLWag== =AG6M -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From nobody Tue Feb 14 11:42:55 2017 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 47B99129717 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:42:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g-y7cbBtr58Q for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:42:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from durif.tools.ietf.org (durif.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:1900:3001:11::3d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3444129420 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:42:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-43-30.a357.priv.bahnhof.se ([79.136.43.30]:54610 helo=[192.168.1.120]) by durif.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1cdizz-0001TB-As; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:42:52 -0800 To: Michael Richardson , tools-discuss@ietf.org References: <22353.1487097123@obiwan.sandelman.ca> From: Henrik Levkowetz Message-ID: <58A35DB3.2070901@levkowetz.com> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 20:42:43 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <22353.1487097123@obiwan.sandelman.ca> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="wxlAmNMwMP6qh5WhMgkXjFbbmGPG0pt4H" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 79.136.43.30 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: tools-discuss@ietf.org, mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca 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 durif.tools.ietf.org) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] xml2rfc --- no more xml.resource.org X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 19:42:54 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --wxlAmNMwMP6qh5WhMgkXjFbbmGPG0pt4H Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="VVW8TRkCn4xbafGC76CmtL6OT4GCuXXcu"; protected-headers="v1" From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Michael Richardson , tools-discuss@ietf.org Message-ID: <58A35DB3.2070901@levkowetz.com> Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] xml2rfc --- no more xml.resource.org References: <22353.1487097123@obiwan.sandelman.ca> In-Reply-To: <22353.1487097123@obiwan.sandelman.ca> --VVW8TRkCn4xbafGC76CmtL6OT4GCuXXcu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2017-02-14 19:32, Michael Richardson wrote: >=20 > I thought that we were going to remove xml.resource.org from the list > of hosts that xml2rfc will search for? because the certificates are > wrong, and it is confusing if you typo a resource and them get a > certificate error when xml2rfc.tools* won't answer. >=20 > I've got 2.5.2 installed... maybe I've missed an update (via pip)? No. xml2rfc is due for a new release, it just needs a little bit of priority. Probably after the Django 1.10 upgrade I'm working on for the datatracker at the moment. Henrik --VVW8TRkCn4xbafGC76CmtL6OT4GCuXXcu-- --wxlAmNMwMP6qh5WhMgkXjFbbmGPG0pt4H Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYo12zAAoJEE6bV0uPuxcasD4P/iWbZguqQf6JRI/JC6M/INkk 0ojlVWtuPcdmmATsb5Y6FFhtBgc4zMHdHXgE36df+FIHlbEEEiWq5dfFmxH21DMk OW/sLOyZemFhCZJmBBnAEAc4kdzmfOb8QkOHYlMQoC5PMGaK7B0JpysEgJL0eJff JcEBQzILTV245GvVEfEGMWTt5EQJ4xUdBQGqvPEIDMw9plTdVHsNMfCXij6jBTGq KFLEsKqA41bYyEp42Iubbg1OWXz/637ePUNk+TYo1SWMElYZd3yk3O2qnbMlNHqb JfcteEzfZ+Rl9ThMvmfShuHZjc4dwEt5+GOQs69KJFKvZ0vG1sKnEH2ZIN7UzAyk t+a7MHaZMqQ/Fq3FvMjapI1TL02ka4J/7cmCvfx2X2TQM5PIQH6rAKkodecUpGwh F7jVRaxcmKpz/DTVfaBGt71uIPZQzF6xlGe55bAmzxG+w7c5Jz498YI1F5U8nlBq 8A9BzYawyPIvUjJp51AdhrzquwCybuaQtbELYgoJc/C70sAqYXkuvBRXt2pjee6K N74FQFyH4A5I6sHE3453hxthgDhhlFPKhMFyl41H5L6M9UsN91EfRl4B8EDBTrea +4UFiFemCLqOsk8ysbO8+OdluXDtK6sicmJA3GOt/eIgukbeBRXdah/tLbb65nR0 zCx28whzlE5eLS6oHeg3 =iA0a -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --wxlAmNMwMP6qh5WhMgkXjFbbmGPG0pt4H-- From nobody Tue Feb 14 13:34:38 2017 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 63F4B129525 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 13:34:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ki9eut6vGkWF for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 13:34:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A2341294CF for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 13:34:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B602200A3 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:55:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 978636381A for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:34:29 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Richardson To: tools-discuss In-Reply-To: <9A249B84-E693-4273-9688-0CD7AB26D5F2@fugue.com> References: <25691.1487081051@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <9A249B84-E693-4273-9688-0CD7AB26D5F2@fugue.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] webex/webrtc X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 21:34:37 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Ted Lemon wrote: > - since we have no clear SLA, maybe we should just > do our own thing? (JITSI?) > This seems straightforwardly obvious. The only obstacle is that some > corporate firewalls seem to prevent people from using it. Most of those people are screwed trying to do VoIP audio with webex as well, and they simply dial in. But the screen sharing mechanisms sometimes still works for for them if they have a platform with the approved version of JAVA (usually, not unfortunately, a known-to-be secure version of java). So that seems to me, to the be killer problem with JITSI: no dial in available. The webrtc version of webex worked really really well for me, btw. If it would remain, I'd stop yelling cross-platform dogfood. -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEbsyLEzg/qUTA43uogItw+93Q3WUFAlijd+UACgkQgItw+93Q 3WV9OQf/YRp0B6eijkGHhQyJsqo+f7dHRIt5pJwTzWZ1Qao0z1/s+4McS840nCOU 3xPTue4hlHlsaQIkWHSjE7zjjENiOUEy0kAPRl+abhrukK1z1F1OjatF+W597L68 o9VstcbQU8iuNV1WtDj4dOPQjtcgOc+k+f5DlhMBcM++mjPn+q+8BB7hWXO86xGK BDvqxf65WLvyRVelFWpQ+rPKpxm8joxr6mSzF20KonSuFMd7jKRKxc3HPhdvnDEg GJbW0etPiB6HRd+jnuUUVenehlEILAym03chsAfAj2TwrnrTaqPdJojNKx4/FXSB azbb7IbYViRh9GV9XjwdpfbPnP3J0g== =J56n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From nobody Wed Feb 22 08:52:03 2017 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 5013012998D; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:51:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 32XhZsBpqVh5; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:51:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 329D312940A; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:51:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44573E1D3; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:13:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49D6C636BB; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:51:55 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Richardson To: iesg@ietf.org, tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Attribution: mcr X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Archived-At: Subject: [Tools-discuss] BOF to WG link when WG not named the same X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:51:57 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think that this BOF: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/hoakey/about/ led to creation of this WG: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/hokey/about/ but, I can't find anything in either to confirm this! I'm sure the IESG telechat minutes would have made that obvious, but I'd have to search throu= gh a lot to confirm that... Further, https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/concluded/ due to it's length, does not clearly say that hoakey was a BOF. Yes, it was in that BOF part of the page, which is now many screen fulls... hokey was a group. Specifically the box for the BOF says: "security area", which led me (on a = ^F search) to conclude the very short list, must be incomplete. Only after did I know to omit the 'a' (getting hokey) did it all become obvious. Could the "BOF" list boxes say, "Security Area BOFs", since the outer "BOF" box has long since scrolled off my screen? Could there be more of a link From=20the BOF name to an eventual WG? Or from the BOF page? Maybe it is enough for some text to go into the Charter area for a BOF which is given a different named WG, to just say that? (In the end, it was RFC 5295 that we were looking to reference, which we fo= und) =2D- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works -=3D IPv6 IoT consulting =3D- --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEbsyLEzg/qUTA43uogItw+93Q3WUFAlitwaoACgkQgItw+93Q 3WUoOQf9FJzV5uM3g2mmg3Xa2mNxmVS0tllxgvo4x6RwvwGZAaxaa/GOZHbe2Q8x l5vmfxBxDaRNEKEC6No0623TcoR1fTbZdj4xH9+ambp+4xfAPPktoK861Cweml2c LsnIG4Sq0ClfCGhZ6EzvH2Mbg286XEjWcSvCS/HelCyWa275vCqMiq9ik1Ocwqgx QV5l0RpwLMDj65421M5JRgxBNEpEUUtLToz5TOLLwD5OwcrJfVvQzp1jtW/7RhlL E3knax7sxqppLtM6ZeO3724dkvV6up1X+GPTRa3dnhewk2JZ3BGRD+Stjyhii0dQ xxu+MvT3Rh6JFyiZR3DbEYBuo9pH9Q== =wYv1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From nobody Thu Feb 23 01:54:23 2017 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 81F5A129A33 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:54:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G-uyzyHpmHcp for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:54:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qt0-x231.google.com (mail-qt0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7E2C129A5A for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:54:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt0-x231.google.com with SMTP id n21so24253195qta.1 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:54:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=JfRiBndcub8Q+wYXvlbIb4vtd6TUjD1/GP6dtUBA3TI=; b=YaN4stI5A44n5afNJu5GOlih/WzQaFaVMBggzD8d3RtoX37Uekn1X4Hr+yPD4WsSBK kf+GyhKOqXZpM0V5wJ9LsTDcELBNdK7Vu197wQRhn/HzqUzg/Ii6lqN/BNMAiAje6wC4 H2Gtrsgwwhb6z8MH4BG4S4odZdyPyfoFXzNm62JZkrs4Ic/LH6CjOUHLuZ0q+Aiv0Rvf UXLJRAD0adx/OY6U+Te8dRZAKuiH3k2owpZ/expprTOeb8vM6UtwgOX+Mkpd+CpPs6Ld 3TSOuWi5Q91gPEw1zJswx7EqdDlnuj2gpS5Qn5BJRpfCmIoeRt9J0n+iPNZln8gYarKM 7W/A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=JfRiBndcub8Q+wYXvlbIb4vtd6TUjD1/GP6dtUBA3TI=; b=R3qMoXuCmrXCbxlQ8EmvT5x1Oa2BK3SR7k05fCRNrPIk5IxZB/ajUuBS5cQx4FuS3B PjOqUlNvPQ4xsylysuvV91oqKHj4qYYPoL8/gupEkq9giVlO/C85F7Y2L9f92fX3eCO/ Qa8n0yZPviaQrG+2qZRsLBJyaj1+2yjc2UTxeMb9HPjmr0vXyRilLwOZsciGpbAFrYr/ L8X4Q7U1VJUyIqgqp99GcpIhfMSv1Qe+lotSbIoVvklof4f8ostuGmxzx9jc3GmVIriV asZhCKBezTTNl85/YVF6UMihwrEyB4i3CgU/Qb6lYJPeY7S6bhWAdfzs1zVRIFIprL7v NRqg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39ml2cJqUST4VBEiYN7KdAFWuJH4ShilzUksxEFqcrSwXETyw1VEnb+Kd5I9KMnEvMQnSV68uiIBPEUcXw== X-Received: by 10.200.39.200 with SMTP id x8mr34387638qtx.159.1487843659732; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:54:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.19.112 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:47:15 -0800 (PST) From: Martin Thomson Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 20:47:15 +1100 Message-ID: To: "tools-discuss@ietf.org Discussion" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Subject: [Tools-discuss] anchor query string on bibxml resources X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 09:54:22 -0000 I am quite happy with the support for the anchor query string on resources, however it seems to be patchy in how it is implemented. Is this restricted to DOI references? For instance, this is great: https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml-doi/reference.DOI.10.1145/1282427.1282421.xml?anchor=SST But this fails: https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.dukkipati-tcpm-tcp-loss-probe.xml?anchor=LOSS-PROBE From nobody Thu Feb 23 07:52:06 2017 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 6E5E21299FB for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 07:52:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.487 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.487 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1.887, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bO84jnaLbH3y for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 07:52:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E94491299F1 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 07:52:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049287.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049287.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v1NFitTv041496; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 10:52:03 -0500 Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by m0049287.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 28t118b291-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 23 Feb 2017 10:52:02 -0500 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v1NFq17k022756; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 10:52:01 -0500 Received: from mlpi409.sfdc.sbc.com (mlpi409.sfdc.sbc.com [130.9.128.241]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v1NFptvc022568 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 23 Feb 2017 10:51:56 -0500 Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUBAG.ITServices.sbc.com (MISOUT7MSGHUBAG.itservices.sbc.com [130.9.129.151]) by mlpi409.sfdc.sbc.com (RSA Interceptor); Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:51:37 GMT Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSRCG.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.7.51]) by MISOUT7MSGHUBAG.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.9.129.151]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 10:51:37 -0500 From: "HANSEN, TONY L" To: Martin Thomson , "tools-discuss@ietf.org Discussion" Thread-Topic: [Tools-discuss] anchor query string on bibxml resources Thread-Index: AQHSjbrT5cPWcy7zjkGntBMC3uLSvaF2vfcA Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:51:36 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.110.241.167] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-02-23_11:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1612050000 definitions=main-1702230148 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] anchor query string on bibxml resources X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:52:05 -0000 QXMgZG9jdW1lbnRlZCBhdCBodHRwczovL3htbDJyZmMudG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcvLCBvbmx5IGJp YnhtbDcgKGJpYnhtbC1kb2kpIGFuZCBiaWJ4bWw4IChiaWJ4bWwtaWFuYSkgY3VycmVudGx5IHN1 cHBvcnQgdGhlIGFuY2hvcj0gb3B0aW9uLiBUaGUgcmVhc29uIGlzIHRoYXQgdGhlIGltcGxlbWVu dGF0aW9uIGlzIHRvdGFsbHkgZGlmZmVyZW50OyB0aGVzZSB1c2UgYW4gYWN0aXZlIHNjcmlwdCB0 byBnZW5lcmF0ZSB0aGUgcmVmZXJlbmNlIG9uIGRlbWFuZCwgd2hlcmVhcyB0aGUgb3RoZXIgYmli eG1sIHJlcG9zaXRvcmllcyB1c2UgYmFja2dyb3VuZCBwcm9jZXNzaW5nIHRvIGdlbmVyYXRlIHN0 YXRpYyBmaWxlcy4NCg0KSSBjYW4gdGhpbmsgb2YgYSBmZXcgcG9zc2libGUgd2F5cyB0byBleHRl bmQgc3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgYW5jaG9yPSB0byB0aGUgb3RoZXIgYmlieG1sIHJlcG9zaXRvcmllcywg YnV0IGl0IHdvdWxkIHJlcXVpcmUgc29tZSBhcGFjaGUgcmV3cml0ZSBydWxlIGhhY2tpbmcuIElm IGFueW9uZSB3YW50cyB0byBoZWxwIGRvIHRoYXQsIGZlZWwgZnJlZSB0byBjb250YWN0IG1lIG9m Zi1saXN0Lg0KDQoJVG9ueSBIYW5zZW4NCg0KT24gMi8yMy8xNywgNDo0NyBBTSwgIlRvb2xzLWRp c2N1c3Mgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIE1hcnRpbiBUaG9tc29uIiA8dG9vbHMtZGlzY3Vzcy1ib3VuY2Vz QGlldGYub3JnIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBtYXJ0aW4udGhvbXNvbkBnbWFpbC5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0K DQogICAgSSBhbSBxdWl0ZSBoYXBweSB3aXRoIHRoZSBzdXBwb3J0IGZvciB0aGUgYW5jaG9yIHF1 ZXJ5IHN0cmluZyBvbg0KICAgIHJlc291cmNlcywgaG93ZXZlciBpdCBzZWVtcyB0byBiZSBwYXRj aHkgaW4gaG93IGl0IGlzIGltcGxlbWVudGVkLiAgSXMNCiAgICB0aGlzIHJlc3RyaWN0ZWQgdG8g RE9JIHJlZmVyZW5jZXM/DQogICAgDQogICAgRm9yIGluc3RhbmNlLCB0aGlzIGlzIGdyZWF0Og0K ICAgIGh0dHBzOi8veG1sMnJmYy50b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZy9wdWJsaWMvcmZjL2JpYnhtbC1kb2kv cmVmZXJlbmNlLkRPSS4xMC4xMTQ1LzEyODI0MjcuMTI4MjQyMS54bWw/YW5jaG9yPVNTVCANCiAg ICANCiAgICBCdXQgdGhpcyBmYWlsczoNCiAgICBodHRwczovL3htbDJyZmMudG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5v cmcvcHVibGljL3JmYy9iaWJ4bWwzL3JlZmVyZW5jZS5JLUQuZHVra2lwYXRpLXRjcG0tdGNwLWxv c3MtcHJvYmUueG1sP2FuY2hvcj1MT1NTLVBST0JFDQogDQoNCg== From nobody Fri Feb 24 17:24:56 2017 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 0F01A12965A for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2017 17:24:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dSvbbwSwtW_S for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2017 17:24:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1EF49129659 for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2017 17:24:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 570142009E for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2017 20:46:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25D5A6381A for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2017 20:24:51 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Richardson To: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Attribution: mcr X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 20:24:51 -0500 Message-ID: <28739.1487985891@obiwan.sandelman.ca> Archived-At: Subject: [Tools-discuss] bibxml3 updates X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2017 01:24:55 -0000 After I upload a draft (specifically a new draft!), new bibxml files are created... how long does it take to show up? I guess it also has to get mirrored via the Cloudflare stuff too. 1h? 1d? -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [ ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [