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

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 20 October 2020 08:11 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
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 E06383A0B39 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 01:11:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.146
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.146 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.247, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
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 iEQdOP4jAFUZ for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 01:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E545C3A0B38 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 01:10:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1603181448; bh=HeyVKbRcvjKpPvrhcxQR9d0+Vu97qWoQy8j+R5WxDrI=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=PNS7tOE3qXNRHEbGYobb9L48ZjFrRMp3SQ5vKFNIcYjztEyEsVvdHL7s2l6pFIXZL +zRiaRgJ4DyiIQ2UZMz/HjTjvFRkul4MVYq5pDQFQk3HiwKb6Z/OAcro4V+6oYA9aU nA9C3Dzj7HOT7UuuQfgyTVGzcjb0cF2LCNz5XC+c=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([84.171.154.94]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MjS9C-1k1WSY1WLS-00kxOB; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:10:48 +0200
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Cc: tools-discuss@ietf.org
References: <181dadfc-37bf-46ad-b907-853cad3dccd2@www.fastmail.com> <9ee90430-405b-4cf2-b1e7-5d241698a108@www.fastmail.com> <32564.1603119444@localhost> <8b5ebbef-6dca-1f56-0576-f395815c4b40@gmx.de> <9568.1603129249@localhost> <cc0cf5ac-8706-12c4-5014-a95e7b607bd2@gmx.de> <26473.1603140152@localhost> <9ba7b514-99ff-f828-1610-868d849bfaa1@gmx.de> <488DFAF2-1CD0-4AAC-8A9D-072803042E70@tzi.org>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <522c8471-cbff-9e41-779b-90c13eb37da6@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:10:47 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.3.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <488DFAF2-1CD0-4AAC-8A9D-072803042E70@tzi.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:KzuuQVLY6cudIY/p000k7IAtGhUJxa4D9n2qFW56hPAlRhhnHKa qXuuEw+v3E7eACkouAGYt2He9l/6dLbgjD/trUOD0j7LQYZKwem/Ps0lEyRblcqwG15+iOk 4lrQTITEbNoDa70dp2Qsx7DG9vO6If2vd0ZK7okmg1MbAJrvigBvaS2BRmRVYHfeQsp+3Ig TuR0UTsuQjp3y/yCjhkHw==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:KriwbnMaBn0=:+Y3HDuTVs82rquAdr6autu eN34sF5KPSVIiNbJznm6Yesyg30z5I7znD/1jU1DLRApaD9KD+cqBI7s30EvzUTat5OeEMaU5 LEBKd4s3wgu6vrE+LeUKb2/i+jLfMohCnYCDBOCbuOGGZMq7+r4FEwxapShDc8EuRFyuIGu4u DniDxK3UBDh00/I35EqUg5sdjrMgoY8xAOCPZDdwQW+w2+oln4771hdirgA7E8hSieqoSgnNp ZotfnWWGhigbYCrMk+u7NgbpTYJ2iSEK8VgBCJCn+Tyy1tQ4EY2R2dR3kFcJh9rkX82kANQkf vYx2vS9mP/cORa+FevHQ2QtkuYJ/Ps7OWiWGz1P5OnRfOhEeIqShFtN32hvnpTJsb1eGZIxhZ FdbvkfG0jYgoKRI6vnz4CIA9vnox3jGSkLxUZYRzcN8HVNEy7vCHg2f+yDeEZoUK27Zjt94J4 W7j2/OpHsDw6gP1ulNaWAQXPZM++nmjDL0Ut5JUbX4VAEbCYbUAvtMg7TAVaOh6YZTkESVn6H 9uSyo3udtQcMMvmRRifeL2VEsgxtSD28XRMpNm0YaKS3fYnQiER78P/WHtqPzLTYa5MAYkY96 E3BY+cvOIVovIBrO9NpMiNo+WjV1RR45lxpOQuoeNtiidgFZbuBYtrsHIRCk3n/dp2fwAsf/j EJ6hCS/ZFU/Ht5K2ES9TTKsv2iblJ65GgCugPdQU/8U19gqfhE5mwHsHencXYOcIjNWnFn4No 2d7hGH/pRNVrOv/x6o8cuc2f7HvXShLqIzsPt2G/l27lJbTD1tsdfswlRkehpQ7FeJqLCrcDU CVFFRno0NQombZTeFM3g9LPSH47KIxlACBUzEoYy8SPsbpmBYIDPY0N6V7WGIgmvAQf/vlJBt LZnu4ok+0houe1dTLkSA==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/qDBbOzdT1tA2kpP_zn6pPM1TzMA>
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: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 08:11:02 -0000

Am 20.10.2020 um 08:13 schrieb Carsten Bormann:
>
>> On 2020-10-20, at 06:01, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>>> <!ENTITY RFC2119 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml”>
>> […]
>> We really should have a reliable place for the reference information. I
>> still don't get why we recommended the above URI back in RFC 7749 (I
>> *think* after consuting with the RPC), and now that redirects to
>> tools.ietf.org.
>
> I don’t think RFC 7749 “recommended” that URI; it just used a similar URI in an example for declaring and using an external entity.

That is true. But when we published this, we made sure that this is
actually the URI the RPC wanted us to use.

> Kramdown-rfc briefly used xml2rfc.ietf.org; I don’t recollect exactly why we switched back to xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org as suggested in RFC 7991; I seem to remember that this was to avoid the redirect from xml2rfc.ietf.org to xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org and the attendant SPOF and delay.  After all, xml2rfc.ietf.org continues to say 301 Moved Permanently:

Yes. Until recently it was a 302, but I asked to make that a 301 so the
response can be cached more agressively.

> $ curl -I https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml
> HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently
> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 06:02:05 GMT
> Server: Apache
> Location: https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
> $
>
> I believe that the interface to the canned bibliography information needs to be an integral part of the authoring side of RFCXML, but tools-discuss is the wrong mailing list for that discussion (or is it?).
>
> (Here is the text from RFC 7991 Appendix B.1:
>
>     The most common way to use <xi:include> is to pull in references that
>     are already formed as XML.  Currently, this can be done from
>     xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org, but later this is expected to be from the RFC
>     Editor.
>
> I don’t know who owns the authoring side of RFCXML; if it is the RFC Editor, it might indeed seem logical for this responsibility to rest with the RPC.)

...at least for RFC references. Yes.

Best regards, Julian