Re: [Tools-discuss] nits version mismatch
Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com> Sat, 17 May 2008 00:45 UTC
Return-Path: <tools-discuss-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tools-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90BCA3A6BBF; Fri, 16 May 2008 17:45:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5EA73A6BBF for <tools-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 May 2008 17:45:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.076
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.076 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.523, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WC2E7+lx3NEN for <tools-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 May 2008 17:45:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from merlot.tools.ietf.org (merlot.tools.ietf.org [194.146.105.14]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 054A83A6923 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 May 2008 17:45:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36844 helo=chardonnay-2.local) by merlot.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <henrik@levkowetz.com>) id 1JxAY5-0001rw-Js; Sat, 17 May 2008 02:45:23 +0200
Message-ID: <482E2A9F.10003@levkowetz.com>
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 02:45:19 +0200
From: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Sandra Murphy <sandy@sparta.com>
References: <Pine.WNT.4.64.0805151657260.4620@SANDYM-LT.columbia.ads.sparta.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.64.0805151657260.4620@SANDYM-LT.columbia.ads.sparta.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: sandy@sparta.com, tools-discuss@ietf.org, henrik-sent@levkowetz.com
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on merlot.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] nits version mismatch
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: tools-discuss-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tools-discuss-bounces@ietf.org
Hi Sandy, Inline: On 2008-05-15 23:02 Sandra Murphy said the following: > In a discussion of draft-ietf-l1vpn-basic-mode-04.txt for secdir, I > reported that that the nit checker showed 7 nits. Adrian Farrell said: > >> Hmmm. I wonder which nit checker you used. >> http://tools.ietf.org/tools/idnits/ only reports one warning to me as a >> referenced I-D has subsequently been published as an RFC. > > to which I replied: > > I looked at the page: > http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/l1vpn/draft-ietf-l1vpn-basic-mode/ > which reports: > > > 2008-02-21 16:40 draft-ietf-l1vpn-basic-mode-04.txt > [txt/plain] [txt/pdf] [nits] [diff -from-03, wdiff, txt] > (7 errors (**), 0 warnings (==), 0 comments (--).) Hmm. Right. When I set up the script which creates that page, the things that idnits checked were more limited, and in particular the check result weren't dependent on referenced IDs later being published. I need to change the page to provide a link to a real-time run of idnits. ... >> ** Downref: Normative reference to an Unknown state RFC: RFC 3471 > > Bug in the tool :-( Hm. When was this run? There was a glitch where the RFC state information was unavailable for about a day some time ago -- this might be from that time. Otherwise I need more information to debug it. FWIW idnits does not show that warning now: If you go to the html version of the draft, at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l1vpn-basic-mode-04 there is a link at the top right which leads to an on-the-fly run of idnits, which a moment ago returned: ... == Outdated reference: draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-stitching has been published as RFC 5150 Summary: 0 errors (**), 1 warning (==), 0 comments (--). ... > The RFC clearly states... > Category: Standards Track > > > And I volunteered to alert the Tools Team. > > Hopefully, this is the right address to use for such alerts. It is :-) Thanks. I'll change the static information on pages like the one you originally used so that it will lead to an on-the-fly check, which should be as good as is possible given the changing state of published documents. Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-discuss mailing list Tools-discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss
- [Tools-discuss] nits version mismatch Sandra Murphy
- Re: [Tools-discuss] nits version mismatch Henrik Levkowetz