Re: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

Am 28.11.2020 um 19:54 schrieb John C Klensin:
>
>
> --On Saturday, November 28, 2020 17:47 +0100 Julian Reschke
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Am 28.11.2020 um 13:49 schrieb tom petch:
>>> Retiring the FTP service will impair my ability to contribute
>>> to the IETF.
>>>
>>> For a long time, I struggled to download copies of IETF
>>> documents in the form that the author intended.  The topic
>>> arose on this list and I was pointed at the FTP service and
>>> this solved my problems; the amount of work I could do in the
>>> IETF increased.
>>> ...
>>
>> Ok, I'll bite.
>>
>> Are you saying that when you open
>>
>>     https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7230.txt
>>
>> in a browser and do a "save as...", you're getting a broken
>> document?
>
> Julian,
>
> In the hope of being clear about what we are talking about and
> given Roman's repeated reassurances that none of the plan to
> retire the IETF's FTP serices has anything to do with the RFC
> Editor, would it be correct to say that you meant to ask about
> the IETF's I-D collection, RFC mirror collection, and assorted
> other documents available from the IETF to IETF tools sites?
> ...

Actually, I asked about RFCs on rfc-editor.org - which is clearly the
point to go for authoratative versions of RFCs.

I'm just trying to find out whether something is broken with respect to
http(s) access as opposed to ftp service - be it on ietf.org or
rfc-editor.org. If there is something indeed broken, we should fix it,
right?

Best regards, Julian