IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] archiving outlinks in RFCs

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 28 April 2023 17:19 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD1DEC1CAB21; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:19:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tI14GqgDVrh9; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:19:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7903CC1BE871; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:19:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 071FD3898F; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 13:37:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id VxAVpXjZLUJm; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 13:37:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2:40a:34ff:fe10:f571]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F10B3898E; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 13:37:52 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1682703472; bh=IKIa1b9CIBRyEHhUot+NrGoyo2H76wZmAMbRD5zJs3U=; h=From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=xRS0t7cBwTU+0DWyAxp5ma7GzlphGNu2mubM25+QhA6PBnLfnO3TgM6WljGaKRjg/ 4iET8yCETVH/sI8n3rM8ivLdf8a1yYPKUwAkVgnJEHWgOY6kM9eUYXwye63hk0nWcl rCz6jCadcEaiHE8dUSshw+um8zCkSQr/ldkucVjHjwrHBd1n0vd/z1pcHas6nC20ro 1jTshE38/rWB4vYOzp+PlGnAMobmVnToJaLLsdaKBLCBvPxdYN/jV2laopIjCyldMt F7jutywmJMAfYqbdG2SNlDlv7LGVhTCLpnufUcT6X2QMwzrtH2Dg51+pa8/+P3UKIV XvrqsndPOkyzQ==
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBCE7EA; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 13:19:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Alexis Rossi <rsce@rfc-editor.org>
cc: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
In-Reply-To: <04BE48FA-322D-457A-9D7B-A9DA8FCE8E50@rfc-editor.org>
References: <E024D9AC-2B92-4720-9713-519592D2362B@rfc-editor.org> <30c30c2f-4e96-560a-73dd-a51ba8d04714@comcast.net> <771B7586-FFBB-49E4-9B99-5578863FBD8B@rfc-editor.org> <CABcZeBOevOj8cWY7dacWxzwZS82+iAjf1p+DZWF=7WZ9JydnrQ@mail.gmail.com> <48de4d92-e279-4c26-ab3c-15dd854b56f8@betaapp.fastmail.com> <CABcZeBPqePQwPAq5pWda1pGaY_=kLkcOxCjZWmOv9yRZ_MNb7g@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMBVMTG7Zku4gt_DwCNWArYTauR_O0u70zceCMtN2GNN_Q@mail.gmail.com> <796.1682529129@localhost> <CA+9kkMBiqZCqbDviOVQFmjROYJtViz=S7ZsW6T41mv4XGbZ3=g@mail.gmail.com> <04BE48FA-322D-457A-9D7B-A9DA8FCE8E50@rfc-editor.org>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 27.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 13:19:49 -0400
Message-ID: <31200.1682702389@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-interest/JuokjK0MKkGXo-VdnyKFNa2RUVw>
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] archiving outlinks in RFCs
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 17:19:55 -0000

Alexis Rossi <rsce@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
    > It seems like using the errata system would maybe be a more haphazard
    > method of fixing broken links over time, since it relies on humans to
    > notice the original link is dead, report that as an errata, and then
    > another human to check and approve it. Unless the proposal is to have a
    > bot that files errata when links die (and then there’s just one human
    > step to approve)?

I think that this says more about how antique our errata management system
is, than anything about the durability of the links :-)


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email