Re: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Tools Team Report -- 30 June 2019

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Tue, 02 July 2019 14:49 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB7601200F4 for <tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 07:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 lfOdCcQ37em5 for <tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 07:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 987BD1200EB for <tools-development@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 07:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7244C300AFC for <tools-development@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 10:30:06 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net
Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id nhJFnuRTJvx3 for <tools-development@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 10:30:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from a860b60074bd.fios-router.home (unknown [138.88.156.37]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 59944300A4E; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 10:30:04 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <116d49d6-c179-902c-6bb7-d6e5064689f5@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 10:49:21 -0400
Cc: IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org>, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, IETF Tools Development <tools-development@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <FDAB095A-B99B-4A08-90F0-17492AF0EB50@vigilsec.com>
References: <9CADBCAE-0D0F-41CC-B136-DD4873BAE165@vigilsec.com> <116d49d6-c179-902c-6bb7-d6e5064689f5@gmx.de>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-development/E37LfGKOL5Kz6hp11MOs_HZiXfI>
Subject: Re: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Tools Team Report -- 30 June 2019
X-BeenThere: tools-development@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Tools Development list server <tools-development.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-development>, <mailto:tools-development-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-development/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-development@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-development-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-development>, <mailto:tools-development-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2019 14:49:28 -0000


> On Jul 2, 2019, at 4:25 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> On 01.07.2019 21:55, Russ Housley wrote:
>> ...
>> 3. RFC Services Projects
>>    - Support for the v3 schema has been enabled for I-D submission, and
>>      now the IESG needs to make a policy decision about when I-Ds in the
>>      new format can be submitted to the IESG for publication on the IETF
>>      stream.
>>    - The RFC Production Center continues to test the new format tools.
>>    - The Tools Team has a Statement of Work for the security of the
>>      tools used by the RFC Production Center.  The new format tools will
>>      be reviewed once the tools related to the old format are put in
>>      mothballs.
>>    - A contract for rendering errata in a more useful was awarded to
>>      Soaring Hawk Consulting; code was delivered.  The RFC Editor needs
>>      to figure out how it will be incorporated into rfc-editor.org.
>> ...
> 
> I'll repeat what I said two months ago:
> 
>> Sorry for being pedantic, but we currently have *three* different things
>> that can be called v3:
>> 
>> - the format defined in RFC 7991
>> - the format defined in RFC 7991bis (abandoned for now)
>> - what happens to be accepted by xml2rfc (which has implementation
>> notes, but no proper specification)
>> 
>> Best regards, Julian
> 
> I haven't seen any progress on this since then.

I understand, but these are not actions for the Tools Team.

Russ