From nobody Sat May 27 18:46:07 2023 Return-Path: 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 32C8AC14F6EC for ; Sat, 27 May 2023 18:46:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.893 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.893 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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=rtfm-com.20221208.gappssmtp.com 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 PpKp6oZsQowS for ; Sat, 27 May 2023 18:46:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw1-x112f.google.com (mail-yw1-x112f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::112f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 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 9376BC14F726 for ; Sat, 27 May 2023 18:46:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw1-x112f.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-565eaf83853so4901997b3.3 for ; Sat, 27 May 2023 18:46:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20221208.gappssmtp.com; s=20221208; t=1685238361; x=1687830361; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=KTwKWhEBu45OtlxCKbnigBSa68XsOrkEuXHHmVfJea4=; b=jcmrDmjp+IO1LmSmo+Qt5dTP1oOP6s7mbLty4CSUTUVegLcoC4IxcHHc0aOOUrx/IN 8Bd0UMZKoGUO9u6qf+dnSUn5uGVI/2IeXJ+1ApC6rsHKQ0gM3FbtmDHF128bvG/+oGt5 vRvcN8zom61dYOm4p7DsbW92Z+JD6UyPkxfcovKy6dYa9XO5ySBtHbOWZ8hT5p/hIW6X LCa/spildFUBsx4L60SrYhiPqgQZGOFM4zFin69DN2Plvj0vTf2eyDotzFmGMW7AImpZ 4GWjXBxPEDKY1ExW72SfbyMgrfb3U5qd1mAb7yAHc89JKCeHnOGCK4LC+FvAfayjXsJO poGQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1685238361; x=1687830361; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=KTwKWhEBu45OtlxCKbnigBSa68XsOrkEuXHHmVfJea4=; b=NUgIh+U2wUaGdwIZti/742QLvtSIdatihUekOB7t7OhLIlVvg7OSZmrnU+ylVtKNfp 34YLCL3ykmSbIL1lek0OCPWZ9vG+3sBPcW2lzXn0a63srwz5CXf/wA6Z7x2iL2KMULwp Pc+Ul6XYTU1g/s7wJoJ0V46Q+1MQRXa20TOArBHfCm3pLnROWHlDoU7j4mXH9ZvMjB46 9ciRfOrk88knIxt2RHBn+gENWh1EOvX6DtgB1ZTPnj3zstdgBPJMYV7GuUPOIg/9IPXP s1QnUmG5mjjiGgJ70DF5exFOJAmRt93EtLJQ4ronfSub9AN5kghKCKlx1yqz5SyAuxJV Lo1w== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDw9stYZnBL1mB21i6yTawR+sANd43ShQ6bBvaYBiu3gTvWKCylS 46TrKQeTDrkjgXag467mq2sGtM+adWFCvbsFo654NLCGrQTB81K5wrU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ6f5Nd0mIZqQe3e4yx7m16PuJ40QLiImpAa+mYmoHMs/jIE0qfL2wP1JglIvuYIGxTU0PW1vuaxwDqL62F2QZY= X-Received: by 2002:a81:758b:0:b0:55d:8cee:96e9 with SMTP id q133-20020a81758b000000b0055d8cee96e9mr6873333ywc.5.1685238360712; Sat, 27 May 2023 18:46:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Eric Rescorla Date: Sat, 27 May 2023 18:45:25 -0700 Message-ID: To: tools-discuss , RFC Interest Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000da3ff405fcb7212b" Archived-At: Subject: [rfc-i] Broken relative links to I-Ds 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." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 May 2023 01:46:06 -0000 --000000000000da3ff405fcb7212b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi folks, I've recently noticed that the links to I-Ds in RFCs on RFC-editor.org do not work proper For instance, here is RFC 8555 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8555. It contains a link to draft-ietf-acme-caa-06. Here is the HTML: [ACME-CAA] Landau, H., "CAA Record Extensions for Account URI and ACME Method Binding", Work in Progress, draft-ietf-acme- caa-06, January 2019. Unfortunately, there is nothing at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/draft-ietf-acme-caa-06 Spot-checking, this seems to be true for other ID references in this RFC and others. -Ekr --000000000000da3ff405fcb7212b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi folks,

I've recently = noticed that the links to I-Ds in RFCs on RFC-editor.org do not work proper=

For instance, here is RFC 8555 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8555= . It contains a link to draft-ietf-acme-caa-06. Here is the HTML:
= 

[<a id=3D"ref-ACME-CAA">=
ACME-CAA</a>=
]
              Landau, H., "CAA Reco=
rd Extensions for Account URI and
              ACME Method Binding",=
 Work in Progress, <a href=3D"./draft-ietf-acme-caa-06">draft=
-ietf-acme-</a>
              <a href=3D"./draft-ietf-acme-caa-06">caa-06</a<=
/span>>, January 2019.

Spot-checking, this seems to be true for ot= her ID references in this RFC and others.

-Ekr=

--000000000000da3ff405fcb7212b--