Re: [Tools-implementation] Building an understanding of the directories at ietf/YYmon

If memory serves, the proceedings used to include a snapshot of the I-Ds that were active at the time of the meeting.  This is from a time when the proceedings were distributed as a CD-ROM.

Russ

> On Sep 1, 2020, at 2:39 PM, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> wrote:
> 
> Does anyone already understand what all the directories at /a/www/ietf-ftp/ietf/YYmon (e.g 99nov) are all about?
> 
> I can make some guesses based on what I see there (I think they were an early effort to organize meeting materials, but it would be better if there were a definitive description of them already lying around.
> 
> rjsparks@ietfa:/a/www/ietf-ftp/ietf> ls -d [0-9][0-9][a-z][a-z][a-z]
> 00dec  01mar  03jul  04nov  90dec  92mar  94dec  95jul    97aug  99jul
> 00jul  02dec  03mar  05aug  91jul  92nov  94jul  96dec    97dec  99mar
> 00mar  02jul  03nov  05mar  91mar  93jul  94mar  96jun    98aug  99nov
> 01aug  02mar  04aug  05nov  91nov  93mar  95apr  96mar    98dec
> 01dec  02nov  04mar  06mar  92jul  93nov  95dec  97apr    98mar
> The newest file there is:
> 
> -rw-rw-rw- 1 wwwrun www 279 Aug  1  2001 01aug/opsarea.txt
> 
> Looking through the http configs, they get served at https://www.ietf.org/ietf/YYmon <https://www.ietf.org/ietf/YYmon>, and there are a smattering of hits for them in the logs, all from spiders.
> 
> Some RFCs reference them:
> 
> rfc1719:
> 
> 
>> 1. Introduction
>> 
>>    At the Amsterdam IETF meeting, we held a BOF, entitled the "IPDecide
>>    BOF", on the process and progress of the IPng activities.
>> 
>>    ("IPng" stands for "IP, the next generation".   The IPDecide BOF was
>>    chaired by Brian Carpenter.  Minutes are available in the IETF
>>    directories, with the file name </ietf/93jul/ipdecide-minutes-
>>    93jul.txt>.)
> 
> 
> rfc1752:
> 
> 
>>    [Carpen93] Carpenter, B. and T. Dixon, "Minutes of the IPng Decision
>>       Process BOF (IPDECIDE)", /ietf/93jul/ipdecide-minutes-93jul.txt,
>>       August 1993.
> 
> 
> rfc3238:
> 
> 
>>    [OPESBOF1]  OPES BOF, 49th IETF, December 12, 2000.  Agenda:
>>                "http://www.ietf.org/ietf/00dec/opes-agenda.txt" <http://www.ietf.org/ietf/00dec/opes-agenda.txt>.
>>                Minutes:  "http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/
>>                proceedings/00dec/toc.htm#P25_256" <http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/proceedings/00dec/toc.htm#P25_256>.
>> 
>> IAB                          Informational                     [Page 14]
>> RFC 3238              IAB Considerations for OPES           January 2002
>> 
>>    [OPESBOF2]  OPES BOF, 50th IETF, March 9, 2001.  Minutes:
>>                "http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/01mar/ietf50-40.htm" <http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/01mar/ietf50-40.htm>.
>> 
>>    [OPESBOF3]  OPES BOF, 51st IETF, August 2001.  Agenda:
>>                "http://www.ietf.org/ietf/01aug/opes.txt" <http://www.ietf.org/ietf/01aug/opes.txt>.  Minutes:
>>                "http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/01aug/minutes/OPES.HTM" <http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/01aug/minutes/OPES.HTM>.
> 
> 
> I think these would go into a museum that gets served somewhere, but I don't know if we should force that to continue to be a slice of the www.ietf.org <http://www.ietf.org/> namespace.
> 
> Is it ok to break those few URLs and enter errata against the RFCs to point to where we move them to?
> 
> There's no real win to slice parts of https://www.ietf.org/ietf/ <https://www.ietf.org/ietf/> out with redirects - I'd like to return everything under that url to be something the website (i.e. wagtail) can use. Otherwise we decide to continue to live with having that chunk of the namespace dispatched to a separate service than wagtail.
> 
> RjS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Tools-implementation mailing list
> Tools-implementation@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-implementation