IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Tools-discuss] Strange IDnits behavior (or is it something else?)

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Tue, 22 September 2020 08:04 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
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 2F9A43A0775 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 01:04:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
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 mg4cafz50XRP for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 01:04:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2838B3A046A for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 01:04:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:d505:2b78:dd03:a6b1] (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:d505:2b78:dd03:a6b1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8492E616570; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 11:04:21 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1600761861; bh=EMnbAz7qKrk04dsPtDzlGiQNpb0Dr0kFIeu7igDN4e0=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=ksRPqdu/Ib2N7eOZSEeC1bkjhmd5V1bkC2FLso84UH8l9xpXrTTTrh1Qi4UrMysiE XgYIgfM24GOUypp9ueU3iIEaqK6vEGXx8NyxOmIfgkhUFKssdiACaoVJwgQwVZzvq/ dC+xOo8M2kYedMkYv2rBsbwoz2T2hCVqRu0C6xmE=
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-Id: <94968802-B821-430A-B862-4D473C617AD6@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_CAB599A7-C486-4E1E-90D4-FE7A4C9E1B39"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 11:04:21 +0300
In-Reply-To: <F6AAC66E-C364-40C1-8293-FCF6268A7F3D@tzi.org>
Cc: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, Tools Team Discussion <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
References: <CAKKJt-eeYvfOuFwqTtXeHrYjnw3hQR_u8hb4sc9c1zSi5oXK0Q@mail.gmail.com> <F6AAC66E-C364-40C1-8293-FCF6268A7F3D@tzi.org>
X-MailScanner-ID: 8492E616570.A1C40
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/OTbA_kJI5eRbX_K1DH3HJe1ahSg>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Strange IDnits behavior (or is it something else?)
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 08:04:33 -0000

Hi,
On 2020-7-30, at 6:37, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> On 2020-07-30, at 04:44, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In IDnits, I'm getting
>> 
>>  -- The document date (January 2021) is 170 days in the future.  Is this
>>     intentional?
>> 
>> and that seems to be the Expiration date in the draft (so, I'm confused).
> 
> Yes, I am seeing this behavior for my v3 drafts.

same here.

>> I'm also getting
>> 
>>  -- Unexpected draft version: The latest known version of
>>     draft-irtf-panrg-questions is -04, but you're referring to -05.
>> 
>> but the datatracker DOES have https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-irtf-panrg-questions-05.txt

Same here.

And when running it locally, it fails to download most of the status files it needs, which causes other errors.

> It seems the idnits downloading and caching approach is somewhat brittle…
> Idnits is an amazing script held together by spit and scotch tape.
> I think it is waiting for a full rewrite…
> Until then, it will stay a little quirky.

Given how central idnits is to the review process, I'm not sure living with the quirks is the right approach here.

Lars

v2.41.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status