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

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Fri, 02 March 2012 20:09 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
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 4B0CC21F8514 for <iola-conversion-tool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 12:09:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.546
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.546 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.053, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 MjmvluJEFRC4 for <iola-conversion-tool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 12:09:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from odin.smetech.net (mail.smetech.net [208.254.26.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67F7F21F8512 for <iola-conversion-tool@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 12:09:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [208.254.26.81]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B51C0F24034; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 15:09:59 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net
Received: from odin.smetech.net ([208.254.26.82]) by localhost (ronin.smetech.net [208.254.26.81]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hNgmQlwJupUs; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 15:09:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [192.168.2.104] (pool-96-241-165-215.washdc.fios.verizon.net [96.241.165.215]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C4FF2403E; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 15:09:58 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANb2OvLguHFgVqoG_1D9gGNuVa66HqC_gHAPE8nVLiCgLQNv_A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 15:09:33 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1D6BB920-AF31-458F-8BCA-0BA50D20EEF0@vigilsec.com>
References: <93C55C1D-6DA3-4446-998F-8C5A72824938@amsl.com> <CANb2OvJyCJM+0oPr8ATBuu6NWCakCyX+pficrhbS7Bk3gxyT5g@mail.gmail.com> <CANb2OvLguHFgVqoG_1D9gGNuVa66HqC_gHAPE8nVLiCgLQNv_A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ole Laursen <olau@iola.dk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: 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: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 20:09:36 -0000

 Ole:

> 2012/3/1 Ole Laursen <olau@iola.dk>dk>:
>> There's a slight problem with the IESG state, it doesn't set that to
>> published, we need to get that fixed although I don't think you can
>> actually see it on the document pages.
> 
> I've fixed that so if it is RFC Ed Queue, it'll set it to RFC
> published automatically.
> 
>>> Bug: In the history trails of the RFCs that were published in the last two days, it shows the RFC as being published on 2012-02-01, rather than 2012-02-29 or 2012-03-01:
>>> 
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lear-iana-timezone-database/history/
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-hiprg-dht/history/
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-behave-v4v6-bih/history/
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kucherawy-dkim-atps/history/
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-stone-mgcp-vbd/history/
>>> 
>>> And strangely, for draft-ietf-6man-3627-historic, the history trail does not include an "RFC Published" message from the system at all (although the doc page itself does have a link to the RFC):
>>> 
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-3627-historic/history/
> 
> A careful look at this reveals that it's using 2012-02-01 too, so the
> entry ends up below in the stack.
> 
> For all of these, I've looked at the actual data, and although the
> parser gives me a specific date, the data from the RFC Editor only
> says "February 2012". So it just assumes it's the first day of the
> month. Gah.
> 
> 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.

Russ