From nobody Mon Feb 5 13:18:34 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94CC212D96A for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:18:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 p8_LqFJxyXqL for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:18:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AD1712D969 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:18:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 544A11CAE41 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:18:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8weldUKFK4xu for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:18:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.5.50.44] (70-89-112-166-smc-wa.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [70.89.112.166]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0C6F11CAE3E for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:18:07 -0800 (PST) From: Alice Russo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <17BCE510-F546-4481-82BD-D6F5776DA466@amsl.com> Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:18:28 -0800 To: IETF Tools Development Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Archived-At: Subject: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] FYI, minor change to errata submission form X-BeenThere: tools-development@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Tools Development list server List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2018 21:18:32 -0000 FYI, on the RFC errata submission form we plan to add a "simple math = problem for the user" to deter bots that submit mostly empty forms (or = rubbish content) occasionally. This mechanism has been selected instead = of adding a CAPTCHA or an email address validation process. The = mechanism will be similar to one used on a contact form on the previous = IETF site (https://www6.ietf.org/contact.html). We'll reevaluate in 6 = months if it's serving the intended purpose. Thank you. Alice Russo RFC Production Center= From nobody Mon Feb 5 13:19:20 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47E7612D969 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:19:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 H76qtVE5GBi2 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:19:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43DF012D958 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:19:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2641A3005D0 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 16:19:15 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id W_hV2vDrcMEC for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 16:19:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from a860b60074bd.home (pool-108-45-101-150.washdc.fios.verizon.net [108.45.101.150]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 16F7E300481 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 16:19:14 -0500 (EST) From: Russ Housley Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Message-Id: Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 16:19:15 -0500 To: IETF Tools Development X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Tools Call Agenda -- 6 February 2018 at 1:00 Eastern X-BeenThere: tools-development@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Tools Development list server List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2018 21:19:19 -0000 Tools Call Agenda -- 6 February 2018 at 1:00 Eastern JOIN WEBEX MEETING https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=m440dd848726339c03e605b9956e38bac Meeting number (access code): 640 103 570 Meeting password: tools JOIN BY PHONE 1-877-668-4493 Call-in toll free number (US/Canada) 1-650-479-3208 Call-in toll number (US/Canada) Meeting number (access code): 640 103 570 Meeting password: tools 1. Datatracker Projects - Expected Datatracker Releases -- Robert and Henrik -- http://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb/wiki/MergePlan - IPR changes for BCP79bis - Migrate to Django 1.11 2. Community & Other Projects - Discontinue MonArch email archives -- Robert 3. RFC Services Projects - RFC Format Contracts -- Heather and Robert -- IDnits -- Publication Formatter -- Text Submission -- RFClint -- SVGcheck -- XMLdiff 4. Server Infrastructure - IESG discussions of DMARC -- Henrik and Alexey -- Mailman upgrade -- Impact on Internet-Draft-specific mail aliases 5. Parking Lot - Prepare the RFC Production Center code for publication 6. AOB From nobody Tue Feb 6 09:26:57 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20C8712708C for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 09:26:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 M6g4sSvXw2DD for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 09:26:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (zinfandel.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:1890:126c::1:2a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67B8F126CF6 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 09:26:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-99-61.a357.priv.bahnhof.se ([82.196.99.61]:58764 helo=[192.168.1.120]) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ej71B-0003ov-4w; Tue, 06 Feb 2018 09:26:53 -0800 To: Russ Housley , IETF Tools Development References: From: Henrik Levkowetz Message-ID: <9dbb2017-72c4-b642-3d6b-653a3eabcf41@levkowetz.com> Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 18:26:45 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="nhMaNijIFjEKLcrS41a0BxKDxriHWFKDX" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 82.196.99.61 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: tools-development@ietf.org, housley@vigilsec.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Archived-At: Subject: Re: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Tools Call Agenda -- 6 February 2018 at 1:00 Eastern X-BeenThere: tools-development@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Tools Development list server List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 17:26:56 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --nhMaNijIFjEKLcrS41a0BxKDxriHWFKDX Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="ToLQ1AdpMEnjkTb64kj7Cq6SAhxbbNu8G"; protected-headers="v1" From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Russ Housley , IETF Tools Development Message-ID: <9dbb2017-72c4-b642-3d6b-653a3eabcf41@levkowetz.com> Subject: Re: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Tools Call Agenda -- 6 February 2018 at 1:00 Eastern References: In-Reply-To: --ToLQ1AdpMEnjkTb64kj7Cq6SAhxbbNu8G Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Some notes inline: On 2018-02-05 22:19, Russ Housley wrote: > Tools Call Agenda -- 6 February 2018 at 1:00 Eastern >=20 >=20 > JOIN WEBEX MEETING > https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=3Dm440dd848726339c03e605b9956e38= bac > Meeting number (access code): 640 103 570 > Meeting password: tools >=20 > JOIN BY PHONE > 1-877-668-4493 Call-in toll free number (US/Canada)=20 > 1-650-479-3208 Call-in toll number (US/Canada) > Meeting number (access code): 640 103 570 > Meeting password: tools >=20 >=20 > 1. Datatracker Projects > - Expected Datatracker Releases -- Robert and Henrik > -- http://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb/wiki/MergePlan The merge plan has been updated. > - IPR changes for BCP79bis Released as 6.72.0 > - Migrate to Django 1.11 Started, ongoing. > 2. Community & Other Projects > - Discontinue MonArch email archives -- Robert >=20 > 3. RFC Services Projects > - RFC Format Contracts -- Heather and Robert > -- IDnits > -- Publication Formatter > -- Text Submission > -- RFClint > -- SVGcheck > -- XMLdiff >=20 > 4. Server Infrastructure > - IESG discussions of DMARC -- Henrik and Alexey DMARC workaround ready to deploy, waiting for announcement. > -- Mailman upgrade > -- Impact on Internet-Draft-specific mail aliases >=20 > 5. Parking Lot > - Prepare the RFC Production Center code for publication >=20 > 6. AOB >=20 > _______________________________________________ > TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT mailing list > TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-development >=20 --ToLQ1AdpMEnjkTb64kj7Cq6SAhxbbNu8G-- --nhMaNijIFjEKLcrS41a0BxKDxriHWFKDX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEifjc5+rnL1MJBcZSTptXS4+7FxoFAlp55VUACgkQTptXS4+7 FxpcQw/+JA3eXIoKJyuyBskWek7IU2OidXO3uox+bE8tRIkO/SKxsuVioj3F6gEW 5qGgq9TjJaCWDuzPE+TnEieVRlfHz99pVcWoyzY4rISEKOE2NqmApWijPPqeTGEK RnNnTxhSVxWPNBA0bzWUEy7vQQN8E0n2Vp+lS7K6qvMFzCqNcGFsO+uB/ccAjF5k fdEa1hmCSRrbCXuw9/yzwxd8p/uxPouJX3Oh6oSawPy+hViCAgTTcYE3NiSZcBVm MLHyLibSxru5o3R7Orbj5eGabU6pzT4OG9go0/hnShNeOxkGKAvh5luS//axwbAo OjbZhY8FcUMR1UzAyuIRgvbrXDBCikb3wpUMGk1xFK1U+0Qm2LonqT1lzrRrK33l FR4plsurtS3fhDWhP6ZjmksUpGEMwoYQlAhyKypZFySlbS/7HxH4gfC/QnccQ1be 5AsXbexxoAdQ3MWM1iDT+YteI0X8I3P1wP1Q6ZyyUROqRkbPwtYHL9zxyqAfdHu7 /lHKCoOAQK4cPTPVtj/zktaQCMZLnxlLz6L5XZM68eOaFeOzfFubu5hvJS9XYk3S BvhZANC2OwM6c53zExmlndX+XPSFAY7OqFrQe5hC6B+auJKNpP/aoBUad05OVf0H 8unbSlfXPSaBfwxLjyxGh6Du4H2St3N29cpzJV8dUjyfGCExa3w= =hQ0E -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nhMaNijIFjEKLcrS41a0BxKDxriHWFKDX-- From nobody Mon Feb 12 15:08:50 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 821C112D942 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:08:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.698 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 QhA1IFCpPkN8 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:08:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-oi0-x231.google.com (mail-oi0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::231]) (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 91BA4120726 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:08:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oi0-x231.google.com with SMTP id b3so12473855oib.11 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:08:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=fFJr/nb84eKKGW/94Lff0Dniy2M+2K06WBQiM8a5Vrk=; b=gemvnj+Ulp6lAPJXhKL+6v6b/yIM9XfHoHvKK1wDEgDLFZ6OwN9V94e2z0fc6bHEej SINemkOx6sqWx4u3A1KpEIE93izdKPqnf4zG/FJdRsujz2nF4DGhc/yLv9FjpgWJfux9 xYTNMBMYosbu3BHRoKLqv1ua3aJIAd4fI+BuIywV/dqXmHOpUir82Uryklr6Sdm/XUMM pDBzkKuxyrtcYa1IwL/Ow7xLitZiTGaZmk56UktLKQcMVwnITvqXFXmAZSi+fDLHmTea atfqvKJ6NRfnFS8DbwiKlOwLnb1N8plxCjGOyjGqk2N5uXHSogfqQVXgRs8AYD0xEJM6 dIoA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=fFJr/nb84eKKGW/94Lff0Dniy2M+2K06WBQiM8a5Vrk=; b=rUmdnHIAHMLfolBWZBvfbYoltDKX9ola4DklB1POyn8accTwK00HSo+oc9jR6Ek876 g1aNoj630S6nisoULaQCyPomtB1NshzOr2Pt0y780hvEdZDFFDY8EAsf9aCHm4fp/Ypv B3DSkY4nX6mnPgQQBmlqpsn8BebYIfVJb04eykOwdwInT60xdS/Bma1MF/ki4Hyln8u7 3t8vi6EST+x3c/irWYyUfXndNEXXEX84rW/PDbILDNF6WOnCmDTflmF6FEGpFnTo8J+2 vYRoFfdhpNDXiRpjXTUF9Xk1QE2yJ85EmYLrMPExXD/ytP7FHs2QGtXjWPvDDtRlOMPl Pm4Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPC23hEMAw5hxoPLEtVKNdxPhamt4EiNTPwE2K7RH6YCe0iGySD5 1bRfgquVb8MJFX9Bv5VVm4SkzjCqezCo8khAxmg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x2250iN1uf4ykukP3cZQLrVx/bILKwxv0BgoT8seVU45owaElPswjCTlqTrFNW+EtFzRJauvCl5ozwtWaBH8IKgg= X-Received: by 10.202.87.203 with SMTP id l194mr9384547oib.356.1518476924744; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:08:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:08:44 -0600 From: Alvaro Retana X-Mailer: Airmail (467) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:08:44 -0600 Message-ID: To: tools-development@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113dee7eb2f8f605650bf558" Archived-At: Subject: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Fwd: Checklist for IDs submitted for RFC publication X-BeenThere: tools-development@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Tools Development list server List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 23:08:48 -0000 --001a113dee7eb2f8f605650bf558 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi! If I understand correctly, the ID Checklist [1] was originally (?) used to build id-nits. Can we safely assume that id-nits covers what is in the Checklist? I=E2=80=99m assuming that the tool goes beyond the Checklist. I=E2=80=99m asking because of the e-mail below: the Shepherd Writeup templa= te points at both id-nits and the Checklist=E2=80=A6which is redundant at best= , and confusing at worst given that the Checklist seems to be outdated. It seems to me that we don=E2=80=99t need both. Thanks! Alvaro. [1] https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist.html On February 6, 2018 at 5:14:22 PM, A. Jean Mahoney (mahoney@nostrum.com) wrote: Hi IESG, I consider myself a newbie Doc Shepherd so I carefully go through the Document Shepherd Write-Up template (current dated 24 February 2012). The template points to: https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist.html which has a new URL: https://www.ietf.org/standards/ids/checklist/ (same content though) And this Checklist for Internet-Drafts has experienced a lot of link rot. Below are the nits. However, I think that the checklist could use a more thorough scrubbing than just updating links. For instance, the sections that cover IPR, copyright and boilerplate are dangerously stale. Section 1. Introduction The link to idnits is still good, but Datatracker now has a idnits button on the draft's page. XML2RFC RFC 2629 is obsoleted by 7749 obsoleted by 7991. Section 2.1 Formatting 7. Lots of obsolete RFCs: - RFC 3978 -> RFC 5378 - RFC 8179 -> RFC 8179 - RFC 3667 -> RFC 3978 -> RFC 5378 - RFC 3668 -> RFC 3979 -> RFC 8179 9. Has disappeared but was not noted in the Change Log. It used to say, "Use network byte order in diagrams, see section 5.2 in http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/rfc-style-manual-08.txt" (link 404s). Section 2.2 Required sections - all I-Ds 1. Lots of obsolete RFCs. Would be better to point to where good boilerplate can be found (RFC 7322, RFC 7841, and http://trustee.ietf.org/trust-legal-provisions.html). - RFC 3978 -> RFC 5378 - RFC 3979 -> RFC 8179 - RFC 3667 -> RFC 3978 -> RFC 5378 - RFC 3668 -> RFC 3979 -> RFC 8179 2. http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy -> http://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide 7.C RFC 5226 -> RFC 8126 8. http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy -> http://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide 10 - 12. All the pointers are obsolete. Maybe point to RFC 7322, RFC 7841, and http://trustee.ietf.org/trust-legal-provisions.html. Section 3. Content Issues 1.C. link 404s, point to RFC 7322? 2. "Security Guidelines for MIB Modules" 404s. 4. RFC 3979 -> RFC 8179, but fixing the reference is insufficient. 5. The link is still good, but is there anything newer that can be pointed to? 6.A. RFC 3330 -> RFC 5735 -> RFC 6890 6.C link for example UK phone numbers 404s. 6.D link for example US phone numbers 404s. Section 4. Protocol Issues 4. RFC 3454 -> RFC 7564 -> RFC 8264 Change Log Last update listed is May 12, 2009, but sometime between May 2017 and Feb 2018, Section 2.1 step 9 disappeared. Thanks! Jean --001a113dee7eb2f8f605650bf558 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =
Hi!

If I understand correctly, the ID Checklist [1] was originally (?)= used to build id-nits.=C2=A0 Can we safely assume that id-nits covers what= is in the Checklist?=C2=A0 I=E2=80=99m assuming that the tool goes beyond = the Checklist.
I=E2= =80=99m asking because of the e-mail below: the Shepherd Writeup template p= oints at both id-nits and the Checklist=E2=80=A6which is redundant at best,= and confusing at worst given that the Checklist seems to be outdated.=C2= =A0 It seems to me that we don=E2=80=99t need both.

Thanks!

Alvaro.



= On February 6, 2018 at 5:14:22 PM, A. Jean Mahoney (mahoney@nostrum.com) wrote:

Hi IESG,

I consider myself a newbie Doc Shepherd so I carefully go through the = =20
Document Shepherd Write-Up template (current dated 24 February 2012). = =20
The template points to:

https://www.iet= f.org/id-info/checklist.html

which has a new URL:

https://www.i= etf.org/standards/ids/checklist/ (same content though)

And this Checklist for Internet-Drafts has experienced a lot of link ro= t.

Below are the nits. However, I think that the checklist could use a mor= e =20
thorough scrubbing than just updating links. For instance, the sections= =20
that cover IPR, copyright and boilerplate are dangerously stale.


Section 1. Introduction

The link to idnits is still good, but Datatracker now has a idnits =20
button on the draft's page.

XML2RFC RFC 2629 is obsoleted by 7749 obsoleted by 7991.


Section 2.1 Formatting

7. Lots of obsolete RFCs:
- RFC 3978 -> RFC 5378
- RFC 8179 -> RFC 8179
- RFC 3667 -> RFC 3978 -> RFC 5378
- RFC 3668 -> RFC 3979 -> RFC 8179

9. Has disappeared but was not noted in the Change Log. It used to say,= =20
"Use network byte order in diagrams, see section 5.2 in =20
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/rfc-style-manual-08.txt" (link =20
404s).


Section 2.2 Required sections - all I-Ds

1. Lots of obsolete RFCs. Would be better to point to where good =20
boilerplate can be found (RFC 7322, RFC 7841, and =20
http://= trustee.ietf.org/trust-legal-provisions.html).
- RFC 3978 -> RFC 5378
- RFC 3979 -> RFC 8179
- RFC 3667 -> RFC 3978 -> RFC 5378
- RFC 3668 -> RFC 3979 -> RFC 8179

2. http://www.rfc-editor.o= rg/policy ->
http://www= .rfc-editor.org/styleguide

7.C RFC 5226 -> RFC 8126

8. http://www.rfc-editor.= org/policy ->
http://www= .rfc-editor.org/styleguide

10 - 12. All the pointers are obsolete. Maybe point to RFC 7322, RFC = =20
7841, and http://trustee.ietf.org/trust-legal-provisions.html.


Section 3. Content Issues

1.C. link 404s, point to RFC 7322?

2. "Security Guidelines for MIB Modules" 404s.

4. RFC 3979 -> RFC 8179, but fixing the reference is insufficient.

5. The link is still good, but is there anything newer that can be =20
pointed to?

6.A. RFC 3330 -> RFC 5735 -> RFC 6890

6.C link for example UK phone numbers 404s.

6.D link for example US phone numbers 404s.


Section 4. Protocol Issues

4. RFC 3454 -> RFC 7564 -> RFC 8264


Change Log

Last update listed is May 12, 2009, but sometime between May 2017 and = =20
Feb 2018, Section 2.1 step 9 disappeared.


Thanks!

Jean


--001a113dee7eb2f8f605650bf558-- From nobody Mon Feb 12 15:39:47 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84CE0127076 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:39:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.89 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 SNoPmpPcO33Q for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:39:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 0FEA01200B9 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:39:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.105] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w1CNdgLZ074736 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:39:42 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.105] From: Ben Campbell Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_624EC105-DEAC-42AF-8BAC-982B8341F2D8"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\)) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:39:41 -0600 In-Reply-To: Cc: tools-development@ietf.org To: Alvaro Retana References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Fwd: Checklist for IDs submitted for RFC publication X-BeenThere: tools-development@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Tools Development list server List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 23:39:46 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_624EC105-DEAC-42AF-8BAC-982B8341F2D8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Hi, I don=E2=80=99t think IDNits covers everything in the checklist. It = covers things that are reasonable to mechanically verify, but there are = things in the checklist that really need a human to check. For example, = that any IPR is properly disclosed, the security considerations section = is meaningful, etc. I agree the checklist needs a scrub. Thanks! Ben. > On Feb 12, 2018, at 5:08 PM, Alvaro Retana = wrote: >=20 > Hi! >=20 > If I understand correctly, the ID Checklist [1] was originally (?) = used to build id-nits. Can we safely assume that id-nits covers what is = in the Checklist? I=E2=80=99m assuming that the tool goes beyond the = Checklist. >=20 > I=E2=80=99m asking because of the e-mail below: the Shepherd Writeup = template points at both id-nits and the Checklist=E2=80=A6which is = redundant at best, and confusing at worst given that the Checklist seems = to be outdated. It seems to me that we don=E2=80=99t need both. >=20 > Thanks! >=20 > Alvaro. >=20 >=20 > [1] https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist.html >=20 > On February 6, 2018 at 5:14:22 PM, A. Jean Mahoney = (mahoney@nostrum.com) wrote: >=20 >> Hi IESG, >>=20 >> I consider myself a newbie Doc Shepherd so I carefully go through the >> Document Shepherd Write-Up template (current dated 24 February 2012). >> The template points to: >>=20 >> https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist.html >>=20 >> which has a new URL: >>=20 >> https://www.ietf.org/standards/ids/checklist/ (same content though) >>=20 >> And this Checklist for Internet-Drafts has experienced a lot of link = rot. >>=20 >> Below are the nits. However, I think that the checklist could use a = more >> thorough scrubbing than just updating links. For instance, the = sections >> that cover IPR, copyright and boilerplate are dangerously stale. >>=20 >>=20 >> Section 1. Introduction >>=20 >> The link to idnits is still good, but Datatracker now has a idnits >> button on the draft's page. >>=20 >> XML2RFC RFC 2629 is obsoleted by 7749 obsoleted by 7991. >>=20 >>=20 >> Section 2.1 Formatting >>=20 >> 7. Lots of obsolete RFCs: >> - RFC 3978 -> RFC 5378 >> - RFC 8179 -> RFC 8179 >> - RFC 3667 -> RFC 3978 -> RFC 5378 >> - RFC 3668 -> RFC 3979 -> RFC 8179 >>=20 >> 9. Has disappeared but was not noted in the Change Log. It used to = say, >> "Use network byte order in diagrams, see section 5.2 in >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/rfc-style-manual-08.txt" = (link >> 404s). >>=20 >>=20 >> Section 2.2 Required sections - all I-Ds >>=20 >> 1. Lots of obsolete RFCs. Would be better to point to where good >> boilerplate can be found (RFC 7322, RFC 7841, and >> http://trustee.ietf.org/trust-legal-provisions.html). >> - RFC 3978 -> RFC 5378 >> - RFC 3979 -> RFC 8179 >> - RFC 3667 -> RFC 3978 -> RFC 5378 >> - RFC 3668 -> RFC 3979 -> RFC 8179 >>=20 >> 2. http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy -> >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide >>=20 >> 7.C RFC 5226 -> RFC 8126 >>=20 >> 8. http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy -> >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide >>=20 >> 10 - 12. All the pointers are obsolete. Maybe point to RFC 7322, RFC >> 7841, and http://trustee.ietf.org/trust-legal-provisions.html. >>=20 >>=20 >> Section 3. Content Issues >>=20 >> 1.C. link 404s, point to RFC 7322? >>=20 >> 2. "Security Guidelines for MIB Modules" 404s. >>=20 >> 4. RFC 3979 -> RFC 8179, but fixing the reference is insufficient. >>=20 >> 5. The link is still good, but is there anything newer that can be >> pointed to? >>=20 >> 6.A. RFC 3330 -> RFC 5735 -> RFC 6890 >>=20 >> 6.C link for example UK phone numbers 404s. >>=20 >> 6.D link for example US phone numbers 404s. >>=20 >>=20 >> Section 4. Protocol Issues >>=20 >> 4. RFC 3454 -> RFC 7564 -> RFC 8264 >>=20 >>=20 >> Change Log >>=20 >> Last update listed is May 12, 2009, but sometime between May 2017 and >> Feb 2018, Section 2.1 step 9 disappeared. >>=20 >>=20 >> Thanks! >>=20 >> Jean >>=20 >>=20 > _______________________________________________ > TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT mailing list > TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-development --Apple-Mail=_624EC105-DEAC-42AF-8BAC-982B8341F2D8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEExW9rpd7ez4DexOFOgFZKbJXz1A0FAlqCJb0ACgkQgFZKbJXz 1A1sAg//TKQcLNk5eFF6ndrnDqU7+qTk2V7TZE6FS0lGDg/rWnH9oDqd7P4WgNCA OFLdEeJ4MT1AMivCOlOv1ouVocV3TUWn3pcBQOImDwY4cMhwpiMHzEv3SZLHQ0UR vGWHyup5YdYAr1POducbmOArsEwHaPkAIAO5rzjEJ2+Ket/OybxqgvXsNzMSjKeG +tD1WS3c5hfOc0EIAXtLwmB+8/4Ltv2QLfnQxDbKS6eHXN/q0t2QfAsh2EFfgyuK VCRBNFucEfJzgLOOJWxyndVe5ftvdljfSUINEz8tgZtITUGBMNKuBuYS09hL4fxj HelM4Be5RDnLFXz1DMUbA8QahD29Ih1ZcoTVRezYeBcKLJSKZWdftu+5XQrGLRJG WYr08f40/4OYs3ua0gTlEesDfakbMntGks4MabbQ0lIJ/l8nhSDKH1eGXo7O1b7M jAwxIfaPx9ffyM/6BUbCySOb5BmPpKmsMBJc9iT6U1Xkjcly7ts6YyD+uSBGo/RT cIElkTJceR7V6q7+cdLzIw+jds+v2VYw7s7iULIEjWqlrxZwhT98YK/AsdfB9Q2c 8YoeiXDp/2WRqK6hqB4Qbt8QfWZ3nrNlcOEvkJdT+BnK3EesJhrJXoxeElaptZ7H eNlDf+yWp2NonvSqRUORuFxRRD+Xs5ZwxbJP2/y+EyH24EDuibA= =ik1F -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_624EC105-DEAC-42AF-8BAC-982B8341F2D8-- From nobody Wed Feb 14 05:42:13 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC6981270A7 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 05:42:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fastmail.fm header.b=Ju/5iyzb; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=S4yW9M2l 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 iiYneQj3Fmju for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 05:42:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50309124234 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 05:42:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DB8C20C59 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 08:42:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from web5 ([10.202.2.215]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 14 Feb 2018 08:42:10 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:message-id :mime-version:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; bh=jxbI2XH73EP7xcqhy7XlClMBH028OgVJ/DteAMJmnZE=; b=Ju/5iyzb dwMiinJYBbxV0vEeb013ZoimLtx1j5K4u8tVHzhdaw43GTfQrB4W/X5HfQ0u3thA WuWnCA3HsRAp7ItMWv7fumPzScwBKB6jxASWLMl7CcgF5ZM1ARjibeSgm1/NiGvd jm+YsW8iSrLkFgFg4vrVrEU5VMEX5bk/6T6xoV2gc+YjbAPPkm8YTs2bkZskxe89 eXwYvu+jcEDvSWJaEj7rQdWWkEykfblL4V9OGQO2IHhQp2GvgXWjg7X4VnDDkRRJ lYccYAxH3nWu9Vz0dupJqwrKYx1DmhUv+NSNMKWnrTa85KR6LDo1BJorMBqTL7kQ +l+p5qbKC54v5w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=jxbI2XH73EP7xcqhy7XlClMBH028O gVJ/DteAMJmnZE=; b=S4yW9M2lD70sI8O8wwnHOvZDB3SK6GJIv84xwMa/mQC50 vn2Is7ejuxRSlAydmD8/FtVAAmvqR8yjRVe02xg+wZNIf1YruhGSq8Pxy2tnFagZ OzHtI1UBhKkajMCtCaWL9R0YPAKJQ8KoGPa4d8eRnmOL2U2KubnmzH1ypMez70xb bU7FxnxbUsdwT2hL6FeW1egJpRuYk/IBP8V9v4wWNnnZeex/L+c/zSFWx0EpLOad AAXHlQaUDXA0yNiQfOeIOs4IWgMIDlf1vCA8T9xc74RsrNm9rKoQncWYQFey1qGC GfFPEjFIj1mIinVPBtiacTaZ5pWMwl8M+ZpWYtLZg== X-ME-Sender: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 3E20F9E0AE; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 08:42:10 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1518615730.178589.1270591760.3F631E96@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Alexey Melnikov To: tools-development@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-fde26eb3 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:42:10 +0000 Archived-At: Subject: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Testing DMARC workaround: rewriting p=reject addresses to forwarding addresses X-BeenThere: tools-development@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Tools Development list server List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:42:13 -0000 Hi, We are finally ready to test this on a few mailing lists. Below is a strawman for things to look for: 1) Are rewritten messages being trapped by antispam/quarantine systems? 2) Are any Mail User Agents have troubles with such messages? 3) Do administrators of relevant mailing lists receive notifications about mapped addresses (@dmarc.ietf.org) needing post permission to their mailing lists? 4) Mailing list administrators for mailing list under test should watch out for bounces. Anything else people can think of? Best Regards, Alexey From nobody Wed Feb 14 08:55:57 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 852C312D72F for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 08:55:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 zALd3p5LWCBE for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 08:55:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A19EF126D85 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 08:55:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B2EA300639 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 11:55:51 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id bbGv964bIAJb for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 11:55:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from a860b60074bd.home (pool-108-45-101-150.washdc.fios.verizon.net [108.45.101.150]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 92722300435; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 11:55:50 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Russ Housley In-Reply-To: <1518615730.178589.1270591760.3F631E96@webmail.messagingengine.com> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 11:55:55 -0500 Cc: IETF Tools Development Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0A1FBB86-ADA6-490F-9E27-8FDC312C79F7@vigilsec.com> References: <1518615730.178589.1270591760.3F631E96@webmail.messagingengine.com> To: Alexey Melnikov X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Testing DMARC workaround: rewriting p=reject addresses to forwarding addresses X-BeenThere: tools-development@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Tools Development list server List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:55:55 -0000 Alexey: I think you want to separate 2) into two different questions: 2a) Are any Mail User Agents have trouble displaying such messages? 2b) Are any Mail User Agents have trouble replying to such messages? Russ > On Feb 14, 2018, at 8:42 AM, Alexey Melnikov = wrote: >=20 > Hi, > We are finally ready to test this on a few mailing lists. Below is a = strawman for things to look for: >=20 > 1) Are rewritten messages being trapped by antispam/quarantine = systems? > 2) Are any Mail User Agents have troubles with such messages? > 3) Do administrators of relevant mailing lists receive notifications = about mapped addresses (@dmarc.ietf.org) needing post permission to = their mailing lists? > 4) Mailing list administrators for mailing list under test should = watch out for bounces. >=20 > Anything else people can think of? >=20 > Best Regards, > Alexey From nobody Thu Feb 15 08:00:02 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B156126BFD for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 08:00:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net 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 Wpqnrsw4XvtL for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 07:59:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from gproxy4-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy4-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.23.142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A27FF126BF6 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 07:59:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from CMOut01 (unknown [10.0.90.82]) by gproxy4.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17305175CDB for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 08:59:57 -0700 (MST) Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by CMOut01 with id B3zt1x00K2SSUrH013zwNM; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 08:59:57 -0700 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=Rf/gMxlv c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10 a=Op4juWPpsa0A:10 a=r77TgQKjGQsHNAKrUKIA:9 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=wU2YTnxGAAAA:8 a=m9rGlshOAAAA:8 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=jGqiy6jZAAAA:8 a=Z80JlwQ0AAAA:8 a=QF2H0--CAAAA:8 a=VAYC8C8Uc6QPz9_QqxEA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=Mcy16KhF3aavImdVdHQA:9 a=6TNc0gUBZJ7X3Yw0:21 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=Yz9wTY_ffGCQnEDHKrcv:22 a=Xgp2A1dtSm015NWnEvI6:22 a=w1C3t2QeGrPiZgrLijVG:22 a=jHrLhlbFqA1ZHZAWynec:22 a=Zz-tw7mMPhxMdvFcggwQ:22 a=qLCvuMKpmWptj0pRGMQE:22 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:To: References:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=LjuV5w4iTMeNao/KG/BJEQCY7sJwfFAzkT/ypO1fKhs=; b=a7B9pb5ld5Zn4ZIoCXOgeyOZ91 7T2u0BISyiAxrLfEyseEW/OeaPSGzXbjkX21zL1VjsKnGOA83KwUnDlD304kif3cBw1xb9RT5eKS2 W/ZUV8oWeXjaWz5zk0Tndilfg; Received: from pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.86.101]:53204 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89_1) (envelope-from ) id 1emLwv-0046Gi-9F for tools-development@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 08:59:53 -0700 References: To: IETF Development From: Lou Berger X-Forwarded-Message-Id: Message-ID: <69ac6f08-30c9-909e-de82-24db82a109fc@labn.net> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 10:59:50 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------A329D6A41DFA4FBBA05853E3" Content-Language: en-US X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 100.15.86.101 X-Exim-ID: 1emLwv-0046Gi-9F X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([IPv6:::1]) [100.15.86.101]:53204 X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net X-Email-Count: 6 X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ== X-Local-Domain: yes Archived-At: Subject: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Fwd: Re: MHonArc archives to be retired? X-BeenThere: tools-development@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Tools Development list server List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 16:00:00 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------A329D6A41DFA4FBBA05853E3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit FYI -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: MHonArc archives to be retired? Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 10:33:58 -0500 From: Kathleen Moriarty To: Lou Berger CC: Stephen Farrell , Paul Hoffman , IETF discussion list I also much prefer the MHonArc archives and would not like to see it go away. On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Lou Berger wrote: > It would be good to capture/report any issues you have with the new tool so > that it can be addressed before the old archives go away. The biggest issue > that I've heard is yet to be address is speed to access/browse a WG archive > -- which interestingly enough I don't see in the open tickets [1]... I find it easier to follow email threads, the linkage between them and how easy it is to pick a single message out of the thread are some of the reasons for me. It's the visual access, so I haven't opened a ticket as I think it's not as easy to replicate. Thanks, Kathleen > > Lou > > [1] > https://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb/query?status=assigned&status=deployed&status=new&status=reopened&component=MailArchive%3A+User+Interface&group=priority&col=id&col=summary&col=component&col=status&col=type&col=priority&col=milestone&report=27&order=priority > > > > On 2/15/2018 8:51 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote: >> >> >> On 15/02/18 13:47, Paul Hoffman wrote: >>> >>> Greetings. I got this update to an issue that I had opened about a year >>> ago: >> >> Add me to the list who would not like to see the mhonarc archives >> retired. While I do like the new one, I also often prefer the old >> one. >> >> S >> >>> Forwarded message: >>> >>>> From: ietfdb issue tracker >>>> To: paul.hoffman@vpnc.org, rcross@amsl.com, rjsparks@nostrum.com >>>> Cc: henrik@levkowetz.com >>>> Subject: Re: [ietfdb] #2227 (MailArchive: User Interface): Lack of >>>> text wrapping makes MHonArc archive unusable >>>> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 05:32:57 -0000 >>>> >>>> #2227: Lack of text wrapping makes MHonArc archive unusable >>>> >>>> Changes (by rcross@amsl.com): >>>> >>>> * status: new => closed >>>> * resolution: => wontfix >>>> >>>> >>>> Comment: >>>> >>>> The MHonArc archive will soon be retired. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ------------------------------------------+----------------------------- >>>> Reporter: paul.hoffman@vpnc.org | Owner: >>>> rcross@amsl.com >>>> Type: defect | Status: closed >>>> Priority: n/a | Milestone: (None) >>>> Component: MailArchive: User Interface | Version: 6.x.x >>>> Resolution: wontfix | Keywords: >>>> ------------------------------------------+----------------------------- >>> >>> Was there an IETF / IAOC decision to retire the MHonArc archive? The new >>> mail archiver still has some pretty serious faults for those of us who >>> need to skim WG archives by date. >>> >>> --Paul Hoffman >>> >>> > -- Best regards, Kathleen --------------A329D6A41DFA4FBBA05853E3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

FYI



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: MHonArc archives to be retired?
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 10:33:58 -0500
From: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
CC: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org> 


I also much prefer the MHonArc archives and would not like to see it go away.

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> wrote:
> It would be good to capture/report any issues you have with the new tool so
> that it can be addressed before the old archives go away.  The biggest issue
> that I've heard is yet to be address is speed to access/browse a WG archive
> -- which interestingly enough I don't see in the open tickets [1]...

I find it easier to follow email threads, the linkage between them and
how easy it is to pick a single message out of the thread are some of
the reasons for me.  It's the visual access, so I haven't opened a
ticket as I think it's not as easy to replicate.

Thanks,
Kathleen

>
> Lou
>
> [1]
> https://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb/query?status=assigned&status=deployed&status=new&status=reopened&component=MailArchive%3A+User+Interface&group=priority&col=id&col=summary&col=component&col=status&col=type&col=priority&col=milestone&report=27&order=priority
>
>
>
> On 2/15/2018 8:51 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 15/02/18 13:47, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>>
>>> Greetings. I got this update to an issue that I had opened about a year
>>> ago:
>>
>> Add me to the list who would not like to see the mhonarc archives
>> retired. While I do like the new one, I also often prefer the old
>> one.
>>
>> S
>>
>>> Forwarded message:
>>>
>>>> From: ietfdb issue tracker <trac@tools.ietf.org>
>>>> To: paul.hoffman@vpnc.org, rcross@amsl.com, rjsparks@nostrum.com
>>>> Cc: henrik@levkowetz.com
>>>> Subject: Re: [ietfdb] #2227 (MailArchive: User Interface): Lack of
>>>> text wrapping makes MHonArc archive unusable
>>>> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 05:32:57 -0000
>>>>
>>>> #2227: Lack of text wrapping makes MHonArc archive unusable
>>>>
>>>> Changes (by rcross@amsl.com):
>>>>
>>>>   * status:  new => closed
>>>>   * resolution:   => wontfix
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Comment:
>>>>
>>>>   The MHonArc archive will soon be retired.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> ------------------------------------------+-----------------------------
>>>>    Reporter:  paul.hoffman@vpnc.org        |      Owner:
>>>> rcross@amsl.com
>>>>        Type:  defect                       |     Status:  closed
>>>>    Priority:  n/a                          |  Milestone:  (None)
>>>>   Component:  MailArchive: User Interface  |    Version:  6.x.x
>>>> Resolution:  wontfix                      |   Keywords:
>>>> ------------------------------------------+-----------------------------
>>>
>>> Was there an IETF / IAOC decision to retire the MHonArc archive? The new
>>> mail archiver still has some pretty serious faults for those of us who
>>> need to skim WG archives by date.
>>>
>>> --Paul Hoffman
>>>
>>>
>



-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen
--------------A329D6A41DFA4FBBA05853E3-- From nobody Tue Feb 27 08:31:45 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA10012DA2C for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:31:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 BL_RISGWZUJD for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:31:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 554E312D969 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:31:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D294300548 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:31:29 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id CPAt__7aIt-a for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:31:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from a860b60074bd.home (pool-108-45-101-150.washdc.fios.verizon.net [108.45.101.150]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E56743005D9 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:31:25 -0500 (EST) From: Russ Housley Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_28A443F4-33A8-4D35-8C3B-2D9E4E1C1023" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Message-Id: <0BE277A9-614B-4C50-AF36-76D5EF921516@vigilsec.com> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:31:26 -0500 To: IETF Tools Development X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] IAOC is looking for committee volunteers (2018) X-BeenThere: tools-development@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Tools Development list server List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:31:36 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_28A443F4-33A8-4D35-8C3B-2D9E4E1C1023 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii People on this list may be interested in volunteering for the IAOC = Technology Management Committee. Please send a note to iaoc@ietf.org by = March 19, 2018 if you are interested. Russ > From: IAOC Chair > Subject: [IAOC] IAOC -- looking for committee volunteers (2018) > Date: February 26, 2018 at 12:17:28 PM EST > To: "IETF Announcement List" > Cc: iaoc@ietf.org > Reply-To: iaoc@ietf.org >=20 > The IAOC has a handful of committees to support its work [1]. The role = of an IAOC Committee is to develop materials and make recommendations = for IAOC decisions. Chair and membership in committees is constituted = annually; we will be undertaking that at the London IETF meeting and/or = the IAOC retreat scheduled for late April this year. >=20 > At this time, the IAOC is again interested in broadening non-IAOC = member participation in its committees, if there are one or 2 interested = and suitable community members for each committee. Note that all = committees deal in business sensitive materials, and may require signing = a non-disclosure agreement. >=20 > Please see the charters of the individual committees for further = detail [1]. Committees for which we are considering additional people = are: >=20 > . Finance Committee > . Legal Committee > . Venue Review Committee (NEW) > . Technology Management Committee > . RFP Committee > . Sponsorship Committee >=20 >=20 > We ask those interested to volunteer by sending a message stating = their committee of interest and relevant experience for that committee = to iaoc@ietf.org, by March 19, 2018. The IAOC will review candidates = with the aim of appointing any new members by late April. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Leslie, for the IAOC. >=20 > [1] https://iaoc.ietf.org/committees.html >=20 > Begin forwarded message: >=20 > From: IAOC Chair > Subject: IAOC -- looking for committee volunteers (2018) > Date: February 26, 2018 at 12:17:28 PM EST > To: "IETF Announcement List" > Cc: iaoc@ietf.org > Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org, iaoc@ietf.org >=20 > The IAOC has a handful of committees to support its work [1]. The role = of an IAOC Committee is to develop materials and make recommendations = for IAOC decisions. Chair and membership in committees is constituted = annually; we will be undertaking that at the London IETF meeting and/or = the IAOC retreat scheduled for late April this year. >=20 > At this time, the IAOC is again interested in broadening non-IAOC = member participation in its committees, if there are one or 2 interested = and suitable community members for each committee. Note that all = committees deal in business sensitive materials, and may require signing = a non-disclosure agreement. >=20 > Please see the charters of the individual committees for further = detail [1]. Committees for which we are considering additional people = are: >=20 > . Finance Committee > . Legal Committee > . Venue Review Committee (NEW) > . Technology Management Committee > . RFP Committee > . Sponsorship Committee >=20 >=20 > We ask those interested to volunteer by sending a message stating = their committee of interest and relevant experience for that committee = to iaoc@ietf.org, by March 19, 2018. The IAOC will review candidates = with the aim of appointing any new members by late April. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Leslie, for the IAOC. >=20 > [1] https://iaoc.ietf.org/committees.html >=20 --Apple-Mail=_28A443F4-33A8-4D35-8C3B-2D9E4E1C1023 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii People on this list may be interested in volunteering for the = IAOC Technology Management Committee.  Please send a note to = iaoc@ietf.org by March = 19, 2018 if you are interested.

Russ


From: IAOC Chair <iaoc-chair@ietf.org>
Subject: = [IAOC] IAOC -- = looking for committee volunteers (2018)
Date: = February 26, 2018 at 12:17:28 = PM EST
To: = "IETF Announcement List" <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: iaoc@ietf.org
Reply-To: = iaoc@ietf.org

The IAOC has a handful of = committees to support its work [1]. The role of an IAOC Committee is to = develop materials and make recommendations for IAOC decisions. Chair and = membership in committees is constituted annually; we will be undertaking = that at the London IETF meeting and/or the IAOC retreat scheduled for = late April this year.

At this time, the = IAOC is again interested in broadening non-IAOC member participation in = its committees, if there are one or 2 interested and suitable community = members for each committee. Note that all committees deal in business = sensitive materials, and may require signing a non-disclosure = agreement.

Please see the charters of the = individual committees for further detail [1]. Committees for which we = are considering additional people are:

=     . Finance Committee
=     . Legal Committee
=     . Venue Review Committee (NEW)
=     . Technology Management Committee
=     . RFP Committee
=     . Sponsorship Committee


We ask those interested to volunteer by = sending a message stating their committee of interest and relevant = experience for that committee to iaoc@ietf.org, by March 19, 2018. The IAOC will review = candidates with the aim of appointing any new members by late April.

Thanks,

Leslie, = for the IAOC.

[1] https://iaoc.ietf.org/committees.html

Begin forwarded message:

From: = IAOC Chair <iaoc-chair@ietf.org>
Subject: = IAOC -- looking = for committee volunteers (2018)
Date: = February 26, 2018 at 12:17:28 = PM EST
To: = "IETF Announcement List" <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: iaoc@ietf.org
Reply-To: = ietf@ietf.org, iaoc@ietf.org

The IAOC has a handful of = committees to support its work [1]. The role of an IAOC Committee is to = develop materials and make recommendations for IAOC decisions. Chair and = membership in committees is constituted annually; we will be undertaking = that at the London IETF meeting and/or the IAOC retreat scheduled for = late April this year.

At this time, the = IAOC is again interested in broadening non-IAOC member participation in = its committees, if there are one or 2 interested and suitable community = members for each committee. Note that all committees deal in business = sensitive materials, and may require signing a non-disclosure = agreement.

Please see the charters of the = individual committees for further detail [1]. Committees for which we = are considering additional people are:

=     . Finance Committee
=     . Legal Committee
=     . Venue Review Committee (NEW)
=     . Technology Management Committee
=     . RFP Committee
=     . Sponsorship Committee


We ask those interested to volunteer by = sending a message stating their committee of interest and relevant = experience for that committee to iaoc@ietf.org, by March 19, 2018. The IAOC will review = candidates with the aim of appointing any new members by late April.

Thanks,

Leslie, = for the IAOC.

[1] https://iaoc.ietf.org/committees.html


= --Apple-Mail=_28A443F4-33A8-4D35-8C3B-2D9E4E1C1023-- From nobody Tue Feb 27 12:30:25 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: tools-development@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04CDE1201FA for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 12:30:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 wIDVUkcUGcq0 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 12:30:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A6DD1270AB for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 12:30:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49CA93005D9 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 15:30:20 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id JPcmXy_9OCXi for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 15:30:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from a860b60074bd.home (pool-108-45-101-150.washdc.fios.verizon.net [108.45.101.150]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3CC013004AA for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 15:30:19 -0500 (EST) From: Russ Housley Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Message-Id: Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 15:30:19 -0500 To: IETF Tools Development X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Tools Call Agenda -- 6 March 2018 at 1:00 Eastern X-BeenThere: tools-development@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Tools Development list server List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 20:30:24 -0000 Tools Call Agenda -- 6 March 2018 at 1:00 Eastern JOIN WEBEX MEETING https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=m440dd848726339c03e605b9956e38bac Meeting number (access code): 640 103 570 Meeting password: tools JOIN BY PHONE 1-877-668-4493 Call-in toll free number (US/Canada) 1-650-479-3208 Call-in toll number (US/Canada) Meeting number (access code): 640 103 570 Meeting password: tools 1. Datatracker Projects - Expected Datatracker Releases -- Robert and Henrik -- http://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb/wiki/MergePlan - Migrate to Django 1.11 -- Done 2. Community & Other Projects - Discontinue MonArch email archives -- Robert -- Community clearly still likes MonArch speed 3. RFC Services Projects - RFC Format Contracts -- Heather and Robert -- IDnits -- Publication Formatter -- Text Submission -- RFClint -- SVGcheck -- XMLdiff 4. Server Infrastructure - IESG discussions of DMARC -- Henrik and Alexey -- Deployed for volunteer WGs. Are they happy? -- Mail list system is too fragile. What can be done? 5. Parking Lot - Prepare the RFC Production Center code for publication 6. AOB