Re: [Rfc-markdown] [xml2rfc] [Tools-discuss] End of support for xml2rfc on Python 2.x is coming soon

Robert Moskowitz <> Thu, 10 October 2019 12:49 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA8611200E7; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 05:49:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ewMq3BuYxmf9; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 05:49:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C4E3120018; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 05:49:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CD2C6212D; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:49:46 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id xc4IzpA0RaZM; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:49:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2E31F62124; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:49:38 -0400 (EDT)
To: Carsten Bormann <>, Henrik Levkowetz <>
Cc: RFC Markdown <>, XML2RFC Interest Group <>,, IETF <>, Tools Team Discussion <>
References: <> <> <> <>
From: Robert Moskowitz <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:49:35 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Rfc-markdown] [xml2rfc] [Tools-discuss] End of support for xml2rfc on Python 2.x is coming soon
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "rfc-markdown is a discussion list for people writing I-Ds and RFCs in Markdown and the authors of the tools used for that." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 12:49:50 -0000

On 10/8/19 6:46 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> On Oct 9, 2019, at 00:18, Henrik Levkowetz <> wrote:
>> Signed PGP part
>> Hi Carsten,
>> On 2019-10-08 23:48, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>>> On Oct 8, 2019, at 23:23, Russ Housley <> wrote:
>>>> (2) The default output formatters will change to v3.  The v2 formatters
>>>>    will still be available by using a --legacy switch.
>>> Please do this in a way that will not randomly break scripts and
>>> other programs that need to run xml2rfc. (A calling script/program
>>> has no idea what version of xml2rfc is installed locally.) [Actually,
>>> that is also true of people calling xml2rfc…]
>> Does it work for you if we say 'if you want v2 output, please add --legacy
>> to your scripts already now’?
> It sure works for me, but I don’t know all the other users of my software.
>> The --legacy switch to force v2 output (for compatible input) has been
>> available for around 6 months, so even if you don't have the bleeding
>> edge version installed, this should work as a compatibility path, I think?
> 6 months is very short in the grand scheme of things.
> Generally people will upgrade tools like kramdown-rfc and xml2rfc on different timelines.
> (And there are also a few hundred makefiles in some repositories somewhere that call xml2rfc.)
> With that out of the way, I must admit I don’t even understand what this means:
>    Format Options:
>      --v3                                with --text and --html: use the v3
>                                          formatter, rather than the legacy one.
>      --legacy                            with --text and --html: use the legacy
>                                          text formatter, rather than the v3
>                                          one.
> Does the choice of “legacy” and “v3” formatter have an influence on the accepted XML vocabulary?  On the output format?  Both?  How?

I have encounter:

draft-moskowitz-hip-new-crypto-02.xml(14): Warning: Setting 
consensus="true" for IETF STD document (this is not the schema default, 
but is the only value permitted for this type of document)
  Created file draft-moskowitz-hip-new-crypto-02.txt

when using the--v3 switch.

I have been told not to worry about this, but so far I have not found 
any documentation on "consensus".