Re: [Tools-discuss] another case of links not updating

Henrik Levkowetz <> Wed, 06 May 2020 15:37 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7A013A0AE5 for <>; Wed, 6 May 2020 08:37:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qSo5JNfbvfqU for <>; Wed, 6 May 2020 08:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AA0F3A0AA8 for <>; Wed, 6 May 2020 08:37:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]:57221 helo=tannat.localdomain) by with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1jWM6f-00033d-Ah; Wed, 06 May 2020 08:37:14 -0700
To: Paul Wouters <>,
References: <>
From: Henrik Levkowetz <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 17:36:52 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qqGN3BgbD017gXicPUuNj1qQ5mAkqJ5HC"
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] another case of links not updating
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 May 2020 15:37:24 -0000

Hi Paul,

On 2020-05-06 16:27, Paul Wouters wrote:
> I see another case of links in older drafts not updating that there is a
> newer draft.
> See
> There is a -04 version but it is not indicating this.
> The -04 is also not listed in the 00 to 03 version.
> It's not a "timing" thing either as the -04 was submitted on April 30.

Right.  It's a matter of a cache invalidation trigger sometimes failing.

> This issue has been present for years and I reported back on this many
> times. Perhaps the tools team can share where this code lives, so that
> others including me can have a look at it.

The metadata handling and cache invalidation on resides in
old bash scripts that have not gotten a lot of attention lately, to a
large extent because my time has been dedicated to datatracker and xml2rfc
work the last few years.  With the importance of getting the xml2rfc schema
v3 launced and the effort of moving other tools to the datatracker, the
maintenance of the site has fallen behind.

It's work I want to do, but the hours I have are limited.  I've fixed the
immediate issue, and will try to find time to debug the root cause.