Re: [Tools-discuss] Revision display inconsistency
Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Sun, 19 June 2022 15:53 UTC
Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73D78C14F75F for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Jun 2022 08:53:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.965
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.965 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.876, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nostrum.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ryQpA36RKQYa for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Jun 2022 08:53:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74F0AC14F72E for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Jun 2022 08:53:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.114] ([47.186.48.51]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPSA id 25JFrgmL007411 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 19 Jun 2022 10:53:43 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1655654023; bh=oRTVrmnpLIvlbKp1N+Wh0JupAWyu4oBJ6SjxKmje9Mk=; h=Date:To:References:From:Subject:In-Reply-To; b=jqImwIHGIWrkcXVF/gxa8QKdF2ZiOXbLfEeD+qPoM/IuYFG38EYScmwgU31+EgL9J Kef95159uAbI5xu2GAAkndwhbP9DPa+ZrElN8z/9ti1hiarFqAVnzaP6md97Hg+BxZ P2RQ/yT5s9j8Fbp/NF6l7MA6IWKzrGrE5GF+02h4=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host [47.186.48.51] claimed to be [192.168.1.114]
Message-ID: <0b9f6fdc-88ef-8ccd-7ca3-cdca48a83b05@nostrum.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2022 10:53:37 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Peter Thomassen <peter@desec.io>, tools-discuss@ietf.org
References: <4005f4bf-19c5-7f03-4938-64e7cd78d750@desec.io>
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <4005f4bf-19c5-7f03-4938-64e7cd78d750@desec.io>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/J4sDPNYRP144VLJpYlPwdFPMuF4>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Revision display inconsistency
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2022 15:53:55 -0000
The colored timeline appears correct now. Do you remember if you were logged into the datatracker at the time? (It affects where things are cached). RjS On 6/17/22 5:20 AM, Peter Thomassen wrote: > Hi, > > I uploaded revision -01 of > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping/. > The page now includes the new version of the TXT rendering at the > bottom, but the colored timeline at the top does not have -01 yet. I > suspect this is a caching issue (it's been like that for 15 minutes now). > > Not sure if this is the right place for this; I figured I should drop > it here. > > Cheers, > Peter >
- [Tools-discuss] Revision display inconsistency Peter Thomassen
- Re: [Tools-discuss] Revision display inconsistency Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [Tools-discuss] Revision display inconsistency Robert Sparks
- Re: [Tools-discuss] Revision display inconsistency Robert Sparks
- Re: [Tools-discuss] Revision display inconsistency Peter Thomassen