IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] Wrong Internet search results for new RFCs

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 03 May 2022 02:17 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E80A0C15E6E6 for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 May 2022 19:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1651544249; bh=LK3zdagIvgmvZyzXFkqeizAx9wwGchFYOXcsm5m3dHc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe; b=GBUvWPCMQl8XNkqWo35NVzo/Wt10Ltvxig/fkgsodlaIZwWCgI/gNunRaet4nI6w6 jrNvVUY82H9e7kTCKbg1L98JFqP9Bu3uiLheiczgqoys/f5A++/CIYcUOCkXH96Att 02XlFGikbC2LoV9Wenj0JAs4X2en5vHPhTAu6o2c=
X-Mailbox-Line: From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Mon May 2 19:17:29 2022
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE0EDC159A33; Mon, 2 May 2022 19:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1651544249; bh=LK3zdagIvgmvZyzXFkqeizAx9wwGchFYOXcsm5m3dHc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe; b=GBUvWPCMQl8XNkqWo35NVzo/Wt10Ltvxig/fkgsodlaIZwWCgI/gNunRaet4nI6w6 jrNvVUY82H9e7kTCKbg1L98JFqP9Bu3uiLheiczgqoys/f5A++/CIYcUOCkXH96Att 02XlFGikbC2LoV9Wenj0JAs4X2en5vHPhTAu6o2c=
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 4DF62C159A33 for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 May 2022 19:17:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.852
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.852 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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=n2UKlTOP; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=CFT7lu3E
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 DWjC5qUyS5cb for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 May 2022 19:17:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 361A9C14F745 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 2 May 2022 19:17:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 25606 invoked from network); 3 May 2022 02:17:21 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=6404.627090b1.k2205; bh=M9ZO/s2FQaEJBqbBtOxOBWtFBHhFqlakMozdhnCTBK0=; b=n2UKlTOPOfVQHGwQOBH4vuKLcixJRGDlPnIPm8UNuMc93qFHO0cXfgWmDm1AbmVak3nPRzVaQtkMMUk4lbnsX1sT7j8xlj9nXM4t8wdxoVsAQJVWtMPtNsKSiXp8B24QwNVpnam2MghvfWZtVITFmXSBYTcvsXmRwn4ClmLKv+2LN60W/7h6L9/RjDpdO53A2Ugc3HFFArNQz/x3uTaqH5xaN+TMM/UqXIYgLZxgNm5v6+M4MDiBAB9zbrJ+RxLmLR+XjzAkY+7EWeSdZrxEuOb+NYWucZkqyBkkwWGMl6xrCp/sZFwgGJsLc5+FWHy+7qtpbarskfz+h37UGSKq0w==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=6404.627090b1.k2205; bh=M9ZO/s2FQaEJBqbBtOxOBWtFBHhFqlakMozdhnCTBK0=; b=CFT7lu3EF3tCyRPd+vyvPruyIZXXG0TTEOgyZHYehc/TI100XHA/J98jDsqOcpzTEcVipxyIIwPRCQJbsxC8KSTIAez+9zUFhroHEXoXMMRsHApCoqwS4vq3M6eZTcyF5r/eEIq6v5k4pkwoBq7UFOKBgiQDh+Qw3IYvSpSGeVzJ/Lhsgqbs864SLRZS2a4sueath9yke20unQftpZq4kuDKNTdx4JZQUGPEXeXjEuQppangohdY4T1TtseopKd/FLc4O+JBOfY/a1Ycg+0CMTiTrFnc/HmbxrEL29I/y4JvArRCwTpjUFl6r38Oy+tWNj2SfCl/JA4TN5JGtWIjLg==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 03 May 2022 02:17:20 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 69EDC3F4BACA; Mon, 2 May 2022 22:17:18 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 02 May 2022 22:17:18 -0400
Message-Id: <20220503021720.69EDC3F4BACA@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Cc: tte@cs.fau.de
In-Reply-To: <YnCECATOh9mI1HY4@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Cleverness: minimal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-interest/s_0jFihdCQYRD6q8cV8iJygAxsE>
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Wrong Internet search results for new RFCs
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

It appears that Toerless Eckert  <tte@cs.fau.de> said:
>When i search for RFC9148 on google or bing, i do only get
>
>https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/authors/rfc9148.html
>
>And of course the URL already does not exist anymore.
>And yes, i did at least send a note to google.
>
>I assume that google/bing get these URLs from the searchable directory
>
>https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/authors/

No, that's not how search engines work. They only add working URLs to
their index, and this is particularly strange since I helped the RPC
put site maps on the rfc-editor site that have the right URLs for all
of the RFCs.

When I do a search I see the nonexistent authors page and also a bunch
of pages at https://sandbox-ng.ietf.org/.  This suggests that something got
spidered very strangely during the datatracker upgrade.

I can see if I can ask the RPC to resubmit the site index which should help
it clean out the bad rfc-editor URLs.

R's,
John

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email