RE: Help re-marking an expired, renamed draft?

"VIGOUREUX, MARTIN (MARTIN)" <martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com> Fri, 19 April 2013 17:17 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B7A121F8F05 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:17:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RK3cr0D6nc2N for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com (ihemail1.lucent.com [135.245.0.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97EFF21F9616 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us70uusmtp4.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-5-2-66.lucent.com [135.5.2.66]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id r3JHHqxZ027222 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 19 Apr 2013 12:17:53 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from US70UWXCHHUB02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (us70uwxchhub02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com [135.5.2.49]) by us70uusmtp4.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id r3JHHqDk014276 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 19 Apr 2013 13:17:52 -0400
Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (135.239.2.74) by US70UWXCHHUB02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (135.5.2.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.247.3; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 13:17:52 -0400
Received: from FR712WXCHMBA09.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.5.46]) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.74]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 19:17:49 +0200
From: "VIGOUREUX, MARTIN (MARTIN)" <martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>, "wgchairs@ietf.org" <wgchairs@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Help re-marking an expired, renamed draft?
Thread-Topic: Help re-marking an expired, renamed draft?
Thread-Index: AQHOPRIVua5UpKyyMkiN8ZvVuczu8pjdyX0K
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:17:48 +0000
Message-ID: <FEA27CFACBAF3A429E381E6FD69CDC7305C0E2@FR712WXCHMBA09.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <sjmy5cek0h2.fsf@mocana.ihtfp.org>
In-Reply-To: <sjmy5cek0h2.fsf@mocana.ihtfp.org>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_FEA27CFACBAF3A429E381E6FD69CDC7305C0E2FR712WXCHMBA09zeu_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.33
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/wgchairs>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:17:54 -0000

Derek

If you look at the datatracker for these drafts, the replacement info is indicated, but it is not on tools.ietf.org
I noticed that some differences exist between the datatracker and tools.ietf.org regarding replacement info.
Henrik should be able to tell you more on this.

-m
________________________________
De : Derek Atkins
Envoyé : 19/04/2013 17:25
À : wgchairs@ietf.org
Objet : Help re-marking an expired, renamed draft?

Hi,

I received the following request from one of my WG document authors.  We
renamed a draft from a personally-named draft to a WG-named draft, but
somehow missed the window to get a tombstone installed.  Is there some
way in the data tracker for me to get a tombstone installed?

Thanks,

> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-json-web-token-10 doesn’t say
> that it’s been superseded by
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token .  I know
> that the tool supports it, because, for instance, if you go to
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-json-web-signature-04 you’ll
> see that it’s been marked as having been superseded by the
> draft-ietf-jose version.
>
> Could one of you do what it takes to mark the draft-jones version as obsolete?
>   I just ran across somebody using it today!

-derek
--
       Derek Atkins                 617-623-3745
       derek@ihtfp.com             www.ihtfp.com<http://www.ihtfp.com>
       Computer and Internet Security Consultant