Re: [calsify] draft-ietf-calext-caldav-attachments idnits
Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Thu, 23 March 2017 19:33 UTC
Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: calsify@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: calsify@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC42F129C0B; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.396
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.396 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.796, 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 N6X084mG6Qm8; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:33:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (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 1A86D129C03; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:33:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.121.130]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LsD9n-1cBFKM2bIF-013yF0; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 20:33:17 +0100
To: Ken Murchison <murch@andrew.cmu.edu>, Philipp Kewisch <kewisch@gmail.com>, Calsify <calsify@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-calext-caldav-attachments.authors@ietf.org
References: <c018b87d-fcdc-1df6-7c34-828851283678@gmail.com> <690d6ee4-6902-eb63-aca2-235ebf296b34@andrew.cmu.edu>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <4aedb5f6-1a9b-ae4d-ddad-ed0b90155785@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 20:33:18 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <690d6ee4-6902-eb63-aca2-235ebf296b34@andrew.cmu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:r1HzUA1Qy/y4uJ7n1KS/5KS90HSIaeTdciaQ6RjCovWhphTu4W/ 9ledlJ5RRJXxd3Kb03fkcx+dLR55rRr25UWUvEKjdc6xqjfcrKbKXzCcj2XlZrUzgKnzHry dkpZa6Gk3pohqxAKklBNa4agWyRNX7/Z/unBNgAsLNIr8E+vVGlZa7Ezz7btfO1MzXH9HBc yO8wDcwlEj0krAOvote7Q==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:CwdukilBx/M=:C2KL1hN1hzLZ8+JvxY7/tv zbkE75aWBl2+9XdzGJgIwKUgbqyyEO48U19Hv1KMMROUYMMruuqxWSNUoFNK+JCE2SZaRNqvp 2AKCwcyj4wlSCNRnQUT7zLExAyygRaM5GqczJXqj7JCZZx+Hf2cmrCPid2kxKGnJWgUM2Z+7o fE+nkQBiMFVM2nXnLirTuUZdVxY938ES+qL0VAB01IEgtsePxXZkOZgxhhDER/9kUF1szrkI0 3jrLdFuIFdwx+53OGfvBzsZLN4zyqG98NNxdAhzgP5KMQxM2w3feW2kxPdImaDMaxYPutQY1f 7kufFkjaodOesrGEchioxKXt9ZtrjzCCPy7bfGjIC7BnZQZK9NqTDLNuylWSP/dLZUBWHCcH3 6fH7mhbNRWIBcF7ELCaMcu5KFZ8ItLPfNJD2va34JdPdBHCkR8FpsPErVgGbkOivkDRw7OK0l Q/JrDjWHHuPmwgYqaNbq7t7TmCnRkRgx9r3IfJRGqnJf3OgQBdYdKpr8W+Y5A7Win/R+epAB2 ObAxJecxBDC8Z4eX6n7p2TtnumCFJLMsxqCEgdqkLdV7kNqOP1+YyhZTQPwfMcDSbXvWsHMux 4ClCObOLvZlG063L7EXRy+LL8HQoy+x7BF+qFwD/3BSZBtiPlr5qcDWoKgw4VLEIYpLw9aG3d 5YDipthhADhyUInENfB6GVq2tYOxtDWpS7urd5pz3ReRzXo1vsUkZe9tlcY+DtxLzxSY9JxGw nyyMKTjrrYvL3PLDmLE/5suAd4bSnuA8daWrkH0DQeLiXEwcj9Wy2F8UAE8B0nx+HvvM0RWft U35Me14
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/calsify/4cNAXpMKSzx5ylMg7L96kl96DwI>
Subject: Re: [calsify] draft-ietf-calext-caldav-attachments idnits
X-BeenThere: calsify@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: <calsify.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/calsify>, <mailto:calsify-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/calsify/>
List-Post: <mailto:calsify@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:calsify-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/calsify>, <mailto:calsify-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:33:26 -0000
On 2017-03-23 20:17, Ken Murchison wrote: > Hi Philipp, > > The first 10 of the offending references are automatically generated by > xml2rfc and will not appear when the RFC editor removes the > Implementation Status section. > > The reference to RFC 2518 is used to point to the specification of the > "102 (Processing)" HTTP status code, which was removed (but not > deprecated) in the RFC 4918 update. If the chairs or ADs feel that > there is a better way reference this status code I would be glad to > alter the draft, or possibly re-define it in a separate draft. > > I've CC'd Julian Reschke whom I previously asked about HTTP code 102 and > who suggested that I simply reference RFC 2518. Yes, that's the right thing to do. Best regards, Julian
- [calsify] draft-ietf-calext-caldav-attachments id… Philipp Kewisch
- Re: [calsify] draft-ietf-calext-caldav-attachment… Ken Murchison
- Re: [calsify] draft-ietf-calext-caldav-attachment… Julian Reschke