[nfsv4] xml files for RFC drafts.
David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> Mon, 24 April 2017 16:00 UTC
Return-Path: <davenoveck@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1C21131774 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 09:00:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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] 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 gKjfrS0cEdE6 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 09:00:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x229.google.com (mail-it0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1CCC131798 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 09:00:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x229.google.com with SMTP id g66so1171437ite.1 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 09:00:27 -0700 (PDT)
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=wL3SMCB7jsOPt34cZorEzy6YrCeuBQJ/7GoaKfBbHfQ=; b=FeUkobI0K6OpkIKdqybHLLubYeszGH6k2W5jWSki6PZuoo/wjPI77c6TpiL0Kg6K2M Q8VduhBeIr+Gwv/zL1AEX0Rf3bsHwSzBqxbB6dxk0GZs3VVX39pe5oLTkKvjvRg7QeNh MKS3TmYVFMrFrZIf+Ja8JamIZrI7Ce8yspInEfl1EFur6Hute8DlxtFJ/YxBJyEDxVf8 Pr/3P+tXm7Tg6TbzqUBwMtmTWnGT1PrDoWN0SPpsUvlYBty6T3DV1l2tZzu7eIEMktZf xXKZx6DxODDs6u39EsOmNXu2C9oXE5t78RVGI1Z6M/2FGCYaScW62hymWX2+svGnsKED 21Jg==
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=wL3SMCB7jsOPt34cZorEzy6YrCeuBQJ/7GoaKfBbHfQ=; b=LcRrmaleqPeR8eSZfILUHgcF7i1ykzdG8eCy4jKvJ7YYvcmup435j/lTpjW1PdykKB nt0n7Rfo8mnEhLHOXi2dGv1JwJGkE1eAqCckOGBWgr+gXDuS1ahD+EguMcZmX11M01cf zKwWL9YNQgzQyV+kQBFYI5UjaQB8A+KVwTuLilccKqhsatgIUEBmNqP8PFH4s1LJKWS1 UVdzSEmBx5i/NiZMyZpTpWQf+TMIPkY8mn0MDb9CIO5unaWQbqvt+RtRZ/oloOgwKzZn H2rrAqcCWMuG5UD4glQsw0T9IgVqK9NTDzG4y5fDLOuEgljUDXWtt1x+xZ/3eKMv4h6s Dy6w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/7Z5VxlmJBJIgAZZ3yo3PuVQqlaX/YfPDNCbtJnyUu8wNwDT8nw pCr9Guy+nakMPUSyf+bf2tU1DHYbBQ==
X-Received: by 10.36.228.12 with SMTP id o12mr14581222ith.83.1493049625718; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 09:00:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.175.14 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 09:00:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 12:00:24 -0400
Message-ID: <CADaq8jeB8Ktv3DKuLosrNMm=+1g7YHhS3uyN4EdQY6pO4NAv3g@mail.gmail.com>
To: "nfsv4@ietf.org" <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1113e692bbb4054debb4a2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/CAuI5fnbRbKDEAuLDPBCPkAvrq0>
Subject: [nfsv4] xml files for RFC drafts.
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NFSv4 Working Group <nfsv4.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/nfsv4/>
List-Post: <mailto:nfsv4@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 16:00:43 -0000
I'm trying to get access to the xml versions of RFCs 7530, 5661, and 7931. I've tried a range of drafts leading up to the RFCs and it appears that there are no links to the xml forms of these drafts, even though I'm reasonably sure that the drafts were submitted in xml form and should be available. Does anybody have access to reasonably current drafts in xml form? Also, I'm curious about why this is and if there is any chance of changing it. It might be an simple bug, but I'm wondering if there is to more it than that.
- Re: [nfsv4] xml files for RFC drafts. Benjamin Kaduk
- [nfsv4] xml files for RFC drafts. David Noveck