idnits v3

[NGPixel]

Conditions to check for any input type

• Control characters other than CR, NL, or FF appear (0x01-0x09,0x0b,0x0e-0x1f)
• Byte sequences that are not valid UTF-8 appear
• Non-ASCII UTF-8 appear (comment will point to guidance in draft-flanagan-nonascii)
• Missing Abstract section
  • Text
  • XML
• Missing Introduction section
  • Text
  • XML
• Missing Security Considerations section
  • Text
  • XML
• Missing Author Address section
  • Text
  • XML
• References (if any present) are not categorized as Normative or Informative
  • Text
  • XML
• Abstract contains references
  • Text
  • XML
• FQDN appears (other than www.ietf.org) not meeting RFC2606/RFC6761 recommendations
  • Text
  • XML
• Private IPv4 address appears that doesn't meet RFC5735 recommendations
  • Text
  • XML
• Multicast IPv4 address appears that doesn't meet RFC5771/RFC6676 recommendations
  • Text
  • XML
• Other IPv4 address appears that doesn't meet RFC5735 recommendations
  • Text
  • XML
• Unique Local IPv6 address appears that doesn't meet RFC3849/RFC4291 recommendations
  • Text
  • XML
• Link Local IPv6 address appears that doesn't meet RFC3849/RFC4291 recommendations
  • Text
  • XML
• Other IPv6 address appears that doesn't meet RFC3849/RFC4291 recommendations
  • Text
  • XML
• A possible code comment is detected outside of a marked code block
• 2119 keywords occur, but neither the matching boilerplate nor a reference to 2119 is missing
  • Text
  • XML
• 2119 keywords occur, a reference to 2119 exists, but matching boilerplate is missing
  • Text
  • XML
• 2119 boilerplate is present, but document doesn't use 2119 keywords
  • Text
  • XML
• badly formed combination of 2119 words occurs (MUST not, SHALL not, SHOULD not, not RECOMMENDED, MAY NOT, NOT REQUIRED, NOT OPTIONAL)
  • Text
  • XML
• text similar to 2119 boilerplate occurs, but doesn't reference 2119
  • Text
  • XML
• NOT RECOMMENDED appears, but is not included in 2119-like boilerplate
  • Text
  • XML
• Common terms are incorrectly spelled or use the wrong casing
  • Text
  • XML
• Abstract doesn't directly state it updates or obsoletes each document so affected (Additional comment if Abstract mentions the document some other way)
  • Text
  • XML
• Abstract states it updates or obsoletes a document not declared in the relevant field previously
  • Text
  • XML
• Author's address section title misuses possessive mark or uses a character other than a single quote
• a reference is declared, but not used in the document
• a reference appears to be a downref (noting if reference appears in the downref registry)
• a normative reference to an document of unknown status appears (possible downref)
• a normative or unclassified reference is to an obsolete document
• an informative reference is to an obsolete document
• a reference is to a draft that has already been published as an rfc
• A code-block is detected, but the block does not contain a license declaration

Filename checks

• filename's base name contains characters other than digits, lowercase alpha, and dash
• filename's extension doesn't match format type (.txt, .xml)
• filename's base name doesn't match the name declared in the document
  • Text
  • XML
• filename (including extension) is more than 50 characters

Metadata checks

• Document claims to obsolete an RFC that is already obsolete
  • Text
  • XML
• Document claims to update and RFC that is obsolete
  • Text
  • XML
• Document's status or intended status is not found or not recognized
  • Text
  • XML
• Document's date can't be determined or is too far in the past or the future (see existing implementation for "too far")
  • Text
  • XML

If the document is an RFC

• Missing IANA considerations section
  • Text
  • XML

If the document is an Internet-Draft (that is, not an RFC)

• filename's base name doesn't begin with 'draft', contains two consecutive hyphens, or doesn't have enough structure to contain the individual or stream, potentially a wg name, and a distinguishing name. (draft-example-00 is an error, but draft-example-filename is acceptable)
• Missing IANA considerations section
  • Text
  • XML

Additional metadata check

• version of document is unexpected (already exists, or leaves a gap)
  • Text
  • XML

XML Input Specific Conditions

• any deprecated elements or attributes appear
• metadata and document's 'submissionType' attribute state different streams
• The text inside a <sourcecode> tag contains the string <CODE BEGINS> (Warn that the string is unnecessary and may duplicate what a presentation format converter will produce.)
• The text inside any other tag contains the string <CODE BEGINS> (Warn that if the text is a code block, it should appear in a <sourcecode> element)
• text occurs that looks like a text-document reference (e.g. [1], or [RFC...) (if the text was really a reference it should be in an <eref> tag)
• <rfc> ipr attribute is missing or not recognized
• ipr attribute is not one of "trust200902", "noModificationTrust200902", "noDerivativesTrust200902", or "pre5378Trust200902"
• document is ietf stream and ipr attribute is one of "noModificationTrust200902" or "noDerivativesTrust200902"

Boilerplate checks

• The text inside any tag sufficiently matches any of the boilerplate in the IETF-TLP-4 section 6a-6d (such text should probably be removed and the ipr attribute of the rfc tag should be verified)
• The value of the <rfc> autogeneratedBoilerplateText, if non-empty, does not match what the ipr attribute would cause to be generated

Text Input Specific Conditions

• document does not appear to be ragged-right (more than 50 lines of intra-line extra spacing)
• document contains over-long lines (cut-off is 72 characters. Report longest line, and count of long lines)
• document has hyphenated line-breaks
• Updates or Obsoletes line on first page has more than just numbers of RFCs (such as the the character sequence 'RFC')
• Document starts with PK or BM
• document appears to use numeric references, but contains something that looks like a text-style reference (or vice-versa)
• a string that looks like a reference appears but does not occur in any reference section
• Abstract section is numbered
• 'Status of this memo' section is numbered
• Copyright Notice section is numbered

Boilerplate checks

• TLP-4 6.b.i copyright line is not present
• TLP-4 6.b.i copyright date is not this (or command-line specified) year
• TLP-4 6.b.i or b.ii license notice is not present, or doesn't match stream IETF stream document sufficiently matches TLP-4 6.c.i or 6.c.ii text (restrictions on publication or derivative works)
• More than one instance of text sufficiently matching the TLP-4 6.b.i copyright line occurs
• More than one instance of text sufficiently matching either the TLP4 6.b.i or 6.b.ii license notice occurs
• Document obsoletes or updates any pre-5378 document, and doesn't contain the pre-5378 material of TLP4 6.c.iii
• Any prior version of the document might be pre-5378 and the document doesn't contain the pre-5378 material of TLP4 6.c.iii

If the document is an Internet-Draft (i.e not an RFC)

• contains over-long pages
• report count of pages with more than 58 lines
• doesn't say INTERNET DRAFT in the upper left of the first page
• doesn't have expiration date on first and last page
• doesn't have an acceptable paragraph noting that IDs are working documents
• doesn't have an acceptable paragraph calling out 6 month validity
• doesn't have an acceptable paragraph pointing to the list of current ids
• has multiple occurrences of current id text
• document name doesn't appear on first page
• has more than 15 pages and not Table of Contents
• IPR disclosure text (TLP 4.0 6.a) does not appear
• IPR disclosure text (TLP 4.0 6.a) appears after first page
• pages are not separated by formfeeds
• FORMFEED and [Page occur on a line, possibly separated by spaces (indicates NROFF post-processing wasn't successful)
• section title occurs at an unexpected indentation