[Tools-discuss] STD URLs in Datatracker ... incomplete/broken

[Toerless Eckert <[e-mail]>]

1. If i should raise an issue for this to be tracked, pls. remind me where the URL for cases is..

2. Problem (example): 

   If you go to https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc1112, there is a hot link for the
   faxct that this is (part of) STD 5:

   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/std5/

   This redirects to

   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc1112/

   Which i personally extremely appreciate, but i think it is incorrect, because
   STD5 is actually what e.g. RFC editor says correctly:

   https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/std5

   Aka (from std-index.txt):

   0005 Internet Protocol. J. Postel. September 1981. (Format: TXT=241903
     HTML= bytes) (Also RFC0791, RFC0792, RFC0919, RFC0922, RFC0950, RFC1112)

   Like several other STD's it is a list of RFCs.

   None of the other RFCs in STD 5 have a STD's element in their datatracker page,
   which is rally not a good thing. Same thing for all other STDs conssiting of more than
   one RFC. Only one of them gets STD recognition in datatracker.

3. Proposed solution:

   I have not found on datatracker an equivalent to RFC editors STDs pages, but
   that is really the only correct way to show a STD, aka: include the list of all
   contributing RFCs.

   Not sure if it would be good enough to point all dattracker RFC pages if applicable
   to the RFC-editor URLs for the Standard, or to replicate this into datracker.

   But i would not like to see that datatracker removed STD information. If i am not
   mistaken, Datatracker should even be more authoritative on STD status of RFCs
   than RFC Editor (aka: IETF/ISE designating document status, RFC-Editor just publishing them).

Cheers
    Toerless