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

Cindy Morgan <cmorgan@amsl.com> Mon, 05 March 2012 17:54 UTC

Return-Path: <cmorgan@amsl.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 B254621F85FD for <iola-conversion-tool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 09:54:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.709
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.709 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.110, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 PTbLQsoUWixV for <iola-conversion-tool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 09:54:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.amsl.com (mail.amsl.com [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B845221F8701 for <iola-conversion-tool@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 09:54:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C614C12C6CF; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 09:54:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kha-MrLtCHY9; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 09:54:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [12.22.58.154] (unknown [12.22.58.154]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AB48D12C6CB; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 09:54:49 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Cindy Morgan <cmorgan@amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <86AF53FB-F163-4D61-AD50-34264C62CB0E@vigilsec.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 09:54:50 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <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>
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: Ole Laursen <olau@iola.dk>, 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: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 17:54:55 -0000

Please see below.


On Mar 5, 2012, at 6:27 AM, Russ Housley wrote:

> Ole:
> 
>> 2012/3/2 Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>om>:
>>>> 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