Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-02.txt

Carsten Bormann <> Wed, 30 September 2020 12:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 454C23A0475 for <>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 05:54:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.887
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5eY8Y6PHxq97 for <>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 05:54:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07BC13A041B for <>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 05:54:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C1bmf6qKGzyZg; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 14:54:10 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.\))
From: Carsten Bormann <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 14:54:10 +0200
Cc: Michael Tuexen <>, Gerald Combs <>,, Jasper Bongertz <>,,, Fulvio Risso <>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 623163250.253036-8a43be9e78bbd1a605db6cf9b7268f3e
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <31134.1601317608@localhost> <> <>
To: Guy Harris <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-02.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 12:54:16 -0000

(Keeping CC list, so I’ll probably reach people and not lists.)

> On 2020-09-28, at 22:41, Guy Harris <> wrote:
> There are tools to convert Markdown to v2 or v3 RFC XML:

This is a list of very, very different tools.  Some of these are useful for a “conversion” (as a one-time effort), some are meant to be used in a publishing pipeline where people rarely see the “object file” that happens to be in XML (e.g., mmark and kramdown-rfc).

> so:
> 	1) is it easier to edit Markdown or RFC XML?

I wrote kramdown-rfc a decade ago when I had two days to write six drafts.

I gambled that spending one day on the tool and one day on writing markdown would be quicker than spending two days on writing XML.  

I won.

This was meant as a personal tool to get work done (and, boy, did it speed up my work), but it has found some other users; approximately 20 % of all Internet-Drafts are currently being written in kramdown-rfc (approximately 2 % use mmark).

> 	2) is Markdown rich enough to do everything we want to do?

No.  So there are some additions.

> For 2), I note that
> has a bunch of stuff that GitHub isn't treating as markup, such as the stuff prior to the "Introduction" heading, and the tags such as "{::boilerplate bcp14}".  Is that an extension of Markdown not supported by GitHub's Markdown renderer but supported by some Markdown-to-RFC XML converter,


(I have since sent Michael an automatically upconverted markdown version of the XML, BTW.)

> In addition, the XML version at
> has some additional Decryption Secrets Block secret formats.  Those have data formats that *themselves* call for figures, and I'd been trying, at one point, to determine how to do that in RFC XML v2 format - it might require v3 format.  Can that be handled with Markdown?

You can always fall back to XML inside the markdown, but that is rarely needed.

As an example for a slightly automated form of writing, RFC 7400 was written in markdown, with a significant part of the text generated automatically from a Makefile; this text is then included using the {::include …} construct of kramdown-rfc.

Some resources:

Grüße, Carsten