[Tools-discuss] IPR for draft update in datatracker not as expected?

Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> Tue, 13 August 2024 16:26 UTC

Return-Path: <jhaas@pfrc.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 72E8BC16943F for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Aug 2024 09:26:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.906
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.906 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 q1AzWJdHwP2x for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Aug 2024 09:26:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from slice.pfrc.org (slice.pfrc.org [67.207.130.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 985C6C14CF1C for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Aug 2024 09:26:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (172-125-100-52.lightspeed.livnmi.sbcglobal.net [172.125.100.52]) by slice.pfrc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1195E1E039; Tue, 13 Aug 2024 12:26:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_927E52CE-D0EF-4C05-AF60-05BB3D9A74A7"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.8\))
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 12:26:27 -0400
Message-Id: <E2BE4986-2CBE-4A97-AEA5-3278746906A4@pfrc.org>
To: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.8)
Message-ID-Hash: 3PJ7CXB4FKODTB4CO7IAG5HF3RK6XQ4P
X-Message-ID-Hash: 3PJ7CXB4FKODTB4CO7IAG5HF3RK6XQ4P
X-MailFrom: jhaas@pfrc.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tools-discuss.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [Tools-discuss] IPR for draft update in datatracker not as expected?
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/OeWikCiYU2utlqYhAWbP6zQcAgQ>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tools-discuss-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tools-discuss-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tools-discuss-leave@ietf.org>

Consider the following:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=rfc8955 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=rfc8955>
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=rfc5575 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=rfc5575>

RFC 8955 is a -bis of RFC 5575.

The 8955 IPR page says "5575 doesn't have IPR disclosures".  However, you can see that 5575 absolutely has some.

Is this a bug in the inheritance lookup or am I misinterpreting the intent for the 8955 page's lookup vs. 5575?

-- Jeff