Subject: [Tools-discuss] FW: Idnits tool

From: "David Harrington" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 18:36:52 -0500

Hi, 

Dbh> idnits tools complains about missing Security Considerations
sections.
dbh> draft-ietf-syslog-device-mib-11 seems to have a "Security
Considerations"
dbh> section.
dbh> What exactly is the idnits tool looking for to make the
dbh> determination of whether a document has a Security Considerations
section?

Bill>It looks like it wants the section number to be left-justified.
I'd
Bill>recommend bringing this up on [email-masked] .

David Harrington
[email-masked] 
[email-masked]
[email-masked]

_______________________________________________
Tools-discuss mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 19:53:00 +0100

Hi David,

> Bill>recommend bringing this up on [email-masked] .

That's pretty much it.  Idnits removes the header and footer lines,
and finds the smallest indentation of the remaining lines.  This is
taken to be the indentation of top-level sections, and the security
considerations section is expected to be one.  In this case, the
top-level sections have zero indentation, while the security
considerations section has an indentation flush with the paragraph
text, which makes it indistinguishable from for instance a numbered
list item.

Yes, this isn't ideal, but I think it would be as much of a flaw
if a document without a security considerations section, but with
the words 'security considerations' listed in a numbered list, was
flagged as 'OK'.

I'm sorry -- I don't really have a better resolution for this.

After all, idnits is a only a tool - a human inspecting the document
will swiftly find that there is indeed a security considerations
section, and things are fine.

	Henrik

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 00:00:07 +0100

> section, and things are fine.

BTW, about a year ago I reported that the upload doesn't work with
my browser.  That's not more true, it works now after I've replaced
the <button> element by an <input type="submit" /> button.

Identifying security considerations would be easier using XML sources
when they're availbale.  Is the plan to offer an "XML in, submitted
I-D out" (if it passed all relevant I-D tests) Web form still on the
tools-wish-list ?

Frank

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 00:35:30 +0100

Hi Frank,

> the <button> element by an <input type="submit" /> button.

Aha.  Ok, pages updated.

> when they're availbale.

Yes, of course.

> Is the plan to offer an "XML in, submitted

Well, depends what you mean.  The ID submission tool based on RFC 4228
is now being developed according to the specified first phase.  It will
include testing with ID-nits and the possibility of automatic submission
on pass.  

The next phase, which has yet to be contracted for, will include
submission of .xml, automatic conversion to .txt, idnits check, and
automatic submission at the press of a button.  Is that what you had
in mind, or have I completely misunderstood the query?

	Henrik

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 16:05:47 +0100

Henrik Levkowetz wrote:

> The ID submission tool based on RFC 4228 is now being developed
> according to the specified first phase.  It will include testing
> with ID-nits and the possibility of automatic submission on pass.
 
> submission of .xml, automatic conversion to .txt, idnits check,
> and automatic submission at the press of a button.  Is that what
> you had in mind, or have I completely misunderstood the query?

It's what I meant, and I think it will be a great help also for the
authors.  And almost all pieces already exist, it "only" has to be
integrated.  Please keep "AUTH BASIC over TLS" on the ToDo list :-)

Frank

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 16:29:04 +0100

Hi Frank,

> integrated.  Please keep "AUTH BASIC over TLS" on the ToDo list :-)

Ok, got it :-)

Best,

	Henrik

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 18:25:36 +0100

Henrik Levkowetz wrote:

>> Please keep "AUTH BASIC over TLS" on the ToDo list :-)

> Ok, got it :-)

I just wanted to test the new ION SVN URL, but that 
failed on the "set password" page (no submit button).

Why do I need a password for SVN read access, is that
as it should be ?  I've an SVN client, so maybe that
would work directly if I'd know the URL of the ION
repository.

SVN uses CRAM-MD5, that could be a way to bypass the
DIGEST-MD5 deserts.

Frank

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 21:53:57 +0100

Hi Frank,

> failed on the "set password" page (no submit button).

Ok.  Changed <button /> to <input type="submit" />

> would work directly if I'd know the URL of the ION

You really shouldn't need it for read access, but if
you do, I need to look more closely into the setup to
see if I can split authentication for read access from
authentication from write access.

> SVN uses CRAM-MD5, that could be a way to bypass the

Umm.  Not without additional setup hassles...  I'll keep
it in mind, though.

	Henrik

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 09:52:19 +0100

> authentication from write access.

I slightly suspect that if you try the same URL with
http: instead of https: it will work.

    Brian