Re: new ietf mail archive? permanent urls?

John C Klensin <> Sun, 20 March 2016 14:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64A6E12D535 for <>; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 07:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.001
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YSNM3Fyt2QB8 for <>; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 07:54:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5EE3C12D566 for <>; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 07:53:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <>) id 1ahejt-0007nV-Lh; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 10:53:57 -0400
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2016 10:53:52 -0400
From: John C Klensin <>
Subject: Re: new ietf mail archive? permanent urls?
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on; SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <>
Cc: IETF Discussion <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2016 14:54:01 -0000

For whatever it is worth, I share Lloyd's concern.  The new
setup is fine is one is trying to skim recent discussions on a
mailing list and reasonably so to find a particular subject
thread but I question its utility for references to particular
messages, even references in later messages that one might want
to trace back.  For those purposes, it would be much better to
have a URL that explicitly reflects the list name (WG lists seem
to do that, but the IETF list doesn't) and a date or date
range... or we should supply a DOI (and resolution mechanism) or
appropriately-persistent URN.

By the way, from a small semi-random sample, a large fraction of
the links to WG mailing lists identified at are dead.  Is any effort
being made to capture those discussions for historical purposes?
Would it be worth explicitly identifying the useless links?

As a non-random sample to illustrate the magnitude of the
problem, I went through the links for WG names starting in "a"
and exactly one of those that did not point to an IETF.ORG site
is valid and one is clearly bogus (the domain-part of the URL is
"www/").     So another question is "is anyone meaningfully
responsible for that list?"


--On Sunday, March 20, 2016 11:42 +0000

> okay, I've finally belatedly noticed the new ietf mail archive.
> (because I have a life these days.)
> Is e.g.
> 0_YI5r9w a permanent url? If not, should it be?
> (It's occasionally
> useful to refer to emails directly, and cite text with urls,
> but that doesn't look like a good choice. I mean, no date in
> url? as a hint?)