Re: [iola-conversion-tool] Incorrect time stamps in the History trail for recently-published RFCs

Ole Laursen <olau@iola.dk> Wed, 07 March 2012 15:54 UTC

Return-Path: <olau@iola.dk>
X-Original-To: iola-conversion-tool@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iola-conversion-tool@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF85D21F85AA for <iola-conversion-tool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 07:54:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.839
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.839 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.138, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4T4gzwVv16+y for <iola-conversion-tool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 07:54:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25F4621F859E for <iola-conversion-tool@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 07:54:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by vcbfk13 with SMTP id fk13so6387840vcb.31 for <iola-conversion-tool@ietf.org>; Wed, 07 Mar 2012 07:54:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.52.68.206 with SMTP id y14mr3798585vdt.107.1331135687191; Wed, 07 Mar 2012 07:54:47 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.156.18 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 07:54:27 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <9DDC1B59-E801-46AD-95A7-63223690F946@amsl.com>
References: <93C55C1D-6DA3-4446-998F-8C5A72824938@amsl.com> <CANb2OvJyCJM+0oPr8ATBuu6NWCakCyX+pficrhbS7Bk3gxyT5g@mail.gmail.com> <CANb2OvLguHFgVqoG_1D9gGNuVa66HqC_gHAPE8nVLiCgLQNv_A@mail.gmail.com> <1D6BB920-AF31-458F-8BCA-0BA50D20EEF0@vigilsec.com> <CANb2OvL5dgcQGeJEj0=tLVQMH+qPpkjp6gG=0ZD-Lwd-eyriBQ@mail.gmail.com> <86AF53FB-F163-4D61-AD50-34264C62CB0E@vigilsec.com> <9DDC1B59-E801-46AD-95A7-63223690F946@amsl.com>
From: Ole Laursen <olau@iola.dk>
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 16:54:27 +0100
Message-ID: <CANb2OvKvhg=cWCAFSByJjFx997Hk42CzkPzwkqZ7=_UjJmxr2w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Cindy Morgan <cmorgan@amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQndPEgHkg9r+LwQTfBB2HtMNbpBtNTG4nZLzc0r+seX++Q5GGmCMw6opcQZcc0RGnJ/tsg8
Cc: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, iola-conversion-tool@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [iola-conversion-tool] Incorrect time stamps in the History trail for recently-published RFCs
X-BeenThere: iola-conversion-tool@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of the IOLA / DB Schema Conversion Tool Project <iola-conversion-tool.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iola-conversion-tool>, <mailto:iola-conversion-tool-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/iola-conversion-tool>
List-Post: <mailto:iola-conversion-tool@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iola-conversion-tool-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iola-conversion-tool>, <mailto:iola-conversion-tool-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 15:54:49 -0000

Hi people!

An update on the publication dates of RFCs: I've talked to Henrik
about our options, and we'll go with a solution that doesn't require
any changes in the data provided by rfc-editor.org for the time being.
That's implemented now, so the "RFC published" entries should end up
at the proper spot in the future.

I have a dump of dates obtained from the RFC Editor announcements that
we can use to fix the existing entries.


Ole


2012/3/5 Cindy Morgan <cmorgan@amsl.com>:
> Please see below.
>
>
> On Mar 5, 2012, at 6:27 AM, Russ Housley wrote:
>
>> Ole:
>>
>>> 2012/3/2 Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>:
>>>>> Does anyone know whether we could get the actual date out of the RFC
>>>>> Editor? I can imagine a couple of other hacks to improve on the
>>>>> first-day-of-month-assumption, but by far the most robust thing would
>>>>> if the downloaded data just told us it.
>>>>
>>>> This will be addressed in the future under another task order.  Currently, the RFC Editor send an email to the Secretariat, and the date comes from that email.  The goal is to have a message sent that the datatracker can consume in an automated fashion.
>>>
>>> Aha. If that date could be put into the generated XML file here:
>>>
>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc-index.xml
>>>
>>> Then it's a <1 hour job to fix it in the Datatracker end. The XML file
>>> already says
>>>
>>>       <date>
>>>           <month>March</month>
>>>           <year>2011</year>
>>>       </date>
>>>
>>> so a <day>29</day> would fit the purpose nicely. Would it be feasible
>>> to do this in a not too distant timeframe?
>>
>> This data has never included the day.  I think we need to use the messages that are sent to the secretariat to get the day.
>
>
> And in fact, it's not messages that are sent directly to the Secretariat; we would get the information from the announcements that the RFC Editor sends to IETF-Announce (e.g. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg09972.html).
>
> Best regards,
> Cindy
>