[Tools-discuss] it is worse than I thought: (was Re: disappearing IDs on www.ietf.org)

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 16 September 2020 19:33 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 CE43F3A0BC4 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 12:33:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
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 mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n-Li77c1XlJl for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 12:33:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAAF63A0BC1 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 12:33:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07527389A9 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:11:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id saU_3HQf79bF for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:11:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB8E7389A3 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:11:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4C734F5 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:33:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
to: Tools Team Discussion <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <29220.1600031480@localhost>
References: <8657.1599751932@localhost> <84c8d593-c7b6-4327-338f-9b2b0e7a36e0@levkowetz.com> <0C6D4DE2-F9F3-4C7C-8427-264F34C8C2B7@tzi.org> <26d795d2-3761-2950-4346-62f849d86eed@nostrum.com> <7792.1599768579@localhost> <C73D6AB9-694E-458E-AEEE-45DBDEF623C5@vigilsec.com> <20200913194859.GX3100@localhost> <6B3F25CF-F1BF-4332-89DC-151D31227626@tzi.org> <20200913204107.GY3100@localhost> <29220.1600031480@localhost>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:33:08 -0400
Message-ID: <12683.1600284788@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/W6h0rnP1snz_lVyu1a-USCun5g4>
Subject: [Tools-discuss] it is worse than I thought: (was Re: disappearing IDs on www.ietf.org)
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: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:33:20 -0000

In writing my IETF108 report, I went back to the agenda for IETF108 for a
particulary WG. (Gendispatch in the case), and I wanted to remember who
the exact authors of the draft involved were.  I clicked on the link in the
agenda.

https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/108/agenda/agenda-108-gendispatch-03.html

Oops.  The draft has been replaced.  404 on https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.html
I at least, know what to do.  Some external person, who wants to know what
the IETF has been doing... well, this will really really look unprofessional.

We really really do need the ability to see the version of that document that was discussed
at that session.  So, we need to use the archive link everywhere.
I note that for the first draft, the WG chairs used the tools link for
whatever reason.

**I can't think of a use case where the expiring URL version would ever be useful**

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide