IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [calsify] draft-ietf-calext-caldav-attachments idnits

Ken Murchison <murch@andrew.cmu.edu> Thu, 23 March 2017 19:17 UTC

Return-Path: <murch@andrew.cmu.edu>
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 8A0AF12999B; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:17:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 SMzHvkzoCDmb; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:17:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.andrew.cmu.edu (SMTP.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.157.38]) (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 86D69129BF2; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:17:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.22] (cpe-74-77-85-250.buffalo.res.rr.com [74.77.85.250]) (user=murch mech=PLAIN (0 bits)) by smtp.andrew.cmu.edu (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v2NJHK3a059021 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:17:21 -0400
To: 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>
From: Ken Murchison <murch@andrew.cmu.edu>
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <690d6ee4-6902-eb63-aca2-235ebf296b34@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:17:20 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c018b87d-fcdc-1df6-7c34-828851283678@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-PMX-Version: 6.3.0.2556906, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2017.3.23.190317
X-SMTP-Spam-Clean: 28% ( SXL_IP_DYNAMIC 3, HTML_00_01 0.05, HTML_00_10 0.05, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_1100_1199 0, BODY_SIZE_2000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS 0, DATE_TZ_NA 0, FROM_EDU_TLD 0, IN_REP_TO 0, LEGITIMATE_SIGNS 0, MSG_THREAD 0, MULTIPLE_REAL_RCPTS 0, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED 0, RDNS_POOLED 0, RDNS_RESIDENTIAL 0, RDNS_SUSP 0, RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC 0, RDNS_SUSP_SPECIFIC 0, REFERENCES 0, __ANY_URI 0, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ 0, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT 0, __CC_NAME 0, __CC_NAME_DIFF_FROM_ACC 0, __CC_REAL_NAMES 0, __CP_URI_IN_BODY 0, __CT 0, __CTE 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __FORWARDED_MSG 0, __HAS_CC_HDR 0, __HAS_FROM 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __HTTPS_URI 0, __IN_REP_TO 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_TEXT_P 0, __MIME_TEXT_P1 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __MOZILLA_USER_AGENT 0, __MULTIPLE_URI_TEXT 0, __NO_HTML_TAG_RAW 0, __PHISH_SPEAR_STRUCTURE_1 0, __RDNS_POOLED_1 0, __REFERENCES 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END 0, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE 0, __TO_MALFORMED_2 0, __TO_NAME 0, __TO_NAME_DIFF_FROM_ACC 0, __TO_REAL_NAMES 0, __URI_IN_BODY 0, __URI_NO_MAILTO 0, __URI_NS , __URI_WITH_PATH 0, __USER_AGENT 0)
X-SMTP-Spam-Score: 28%
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 128.2.157.38
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/calsify/JZkPauMOi3MuzBgFWmpEmo3UA4A>
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 19:17:29 -0000

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.


On 03/22/2017 05:35 PM, Philipp Kewisch wrote:
> Hello Authors,
>
> The idnits tool has identified an error and some comments. Could you
> make sure that the references are resolved and double check if the URL
> references are specified in the correct form?
>
> https://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-calext-caldav-attachments-02.txt
>
> Kind Regards,
> Philipp
>

-- 
Kenneth Murchison
Principal Systems Software Engineer
Carnegie Mellon University

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email