[Tools-discuss] Is there a reason to allow prepped content in rfcxml Internet-Draft submissions

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Mon, 05 June 2023 19:40 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 277E6C14CE44; Mon, 5 Jun 2023 12:40:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.677
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" 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 Ww2zXS1foxjB; Mon, 5 Jun 2023 12:40:39 -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 4F7EBC14E515; Mon, 5 Jun 2023 12:40:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.102] ([47.186.48.51]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPSA id 355Jeb2J026900 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 5 Jun 2023 14:40:37 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1685994037; bh=WWP+pxf8VBPrhZrLP0b1NIik2UBCxV/RRX9LAR1dZUA=; h=Date:To:Reply-To:From:Subject; b=SgOTMeLgfWIGp56MhgyUFrPw0jZymzznm2B3RSmZ0+sz3FXQbYv5FvyANWxwCVROT utuA/XmT7gdB/IyRzqXaru+6FHwQ6pIgOu4uOwRUmYkkHWG0FnISL5Ge/6wB6AbCRt VoQJHpSUtykzc+MSJukvt7XhSiLO8gHpbjJHw+RU=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host [47.186.48.51] claimed to be [192.168.1.102]
Message-ID: <69781036-0c86-fd20-8e3b-6b44bc395921@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2023 14:40:31 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.11.2
Content-Language: en-US
To: tools-discuss <tools-discuss@ietf.org>, "rswg@rfc-editor.org" <rswg@rfc-editor.org>
Reply-To: tools-discuss <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/moE57I-_4sotafRCMhu97cSZpGs>
Subject: [Tools-discuss] Is there a reason to allow prepped content in rfcxml Internet-Draft submissions
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: Mon, 05 Jun 2023 19:40:43 -0000

(Note the reply-to set to tools-discuss)

We recently ran into a submission failure where a submitter was working 
on a bis document and had kept some (but not all) parts of the output of 
the preptool in what was submitted in the internet-draft.

Should the submission interface for Internet-Drafts allow any prepped 
content at all? Where would it be problematic if the submission checks 
rejected any submission containing that content?

RjS