[Tools-discuss] idnits not ignoring tombstones?

Elwyn Davies <elwynd@dial.pipex.com> Mon, 14 December 2009 18:33 UTC

Return-Path: <elwynd@dial.pipex.com>
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 776BE3A6405 for <tools-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:33:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.545
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.545 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.054, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 OsDch8izM31B for <tools-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:33:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from a.painless.aaisp.net.uk (a.painless.aaisp.net.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:0:30::51bb:1e33]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E6BA3A68DB for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:33:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 153.107.2.81.in-addr.arpa ([81.2.107.153] helo=[81.187.254.247]) by a.painless.aaisp.net.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <elwynd@dial.pipex.com>) id 1NKFjp-0007vV-10 for tools-discuss@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:33:41 +0000
Message-ID: <4B268587.5030508@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:35:51 +0000
From: Elwyn Davies <elwynd@dial.pipex.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tools Team Discussion <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Tools-discuss] idnits not ignoring tombstones?
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/mail-archive/web/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, 14 Dec 2009 18:33:58 -0000

Hi.

I updated a draft today using xml2rfc bibxml3 repository and then ran
idnits.  I got the following warnings:
>   Checking references for intended status: Informational
>   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>   == Outdated reference: A later version (-22) exists of
>      draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-21
>
>   == Outdated reference: A later version (-06) exists of
>      draft-cordeiro-nsis-hypath-05
>
>   == Outdated reference: A later version (-01) exists of
>      draft-manner-nsis-gist-dccp-00
>
>   == Outdated reference: A later version (-05) exists of
>      draft-manner-nsis-nslp-auth-04
>
>   == Outdated reference: A later version (-02) exists of
>      draft-manner-nsis-peering-data-01
It looks to me as if several of these are incorrect - the most recent
versions are 'tombstones' for expired drafts in some cases
(draft-cordeiro and draft-manner-nsis-gist at least).  Isn't idnits
supposed to ignore tombstones?
[The draft-ietf-nsis-qspec problem is not idnits' fault - the bibxml3
database is out of date as well.]

Regards,
Elwyn