IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Tools-discuss] How do we diagnose DOI errors?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Mon, 19 October 2020 05:39 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A9D93A1394 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 22:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.003
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 95iAtquln_PD for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 22:39:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51F7D3A1393 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 22:39:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CF5DV2WhnzyYs; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 07:39:38 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <181dadfc-37bf-46ad-b907-853cad3dccd2@www.fastmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 07:39:37 +0200
Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 624778777.769052-06db6d771593b65ac1b79d23757f31dd
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <51FF31EC-14A2-40C5-BE66-A9B57552EE9B@tzi.org>
References: <181dadfc-37bf-46ad-b907-853cad3dccd2@www.fastmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/8XnRKwWoeTfVnFrWzR3KG1-LylU>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] How do we diagnose DOI errors?
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 05:39:44 -0000

On 2020-10-19, at 03:58, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:
> 
> I've come to rely on this mechanism for citing documents, but it isn't good if it isn't reliable.  Some better information about how this operates would be great.

As far as I understand, the DOI bibxml is based on the doilit tool that is part of kramdown-rfc2629 (which in turn is using https://dx.doi.org/).  A 24-h cache helps keeping the load down but the data reasonably fresh.  As far as I can see, all kinds of errors are mapped to 404.

One tweak that can help coping with doi.org outages might be keeping the cache indefinitely.  Freshness could still be achieved by *trying* to get a refresh after 24 h, but keeping the cached value in place if that fails for some reason.

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email