Hi Tom,
> On Dec 14, 2023, at 6:52 AM, tom petch <ie...@btconnect.com> wrote: > > <off-list> > > From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsb...@cisco.com> > Sent: 13 December 2023 18:21 > > Tom - > > At some point the WG chairs might want to respond, but the simple answer to > this "mystery" has to do with when a document became an RFC. > > LSR WG was formed in early 2018. It took over the work that was previously > done by the OSPF WG (https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/ospf/documents/ ) and > the IS-IS WG (https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/isis/documents/ ). > > If a document became an RFC after the LSR WG took over, then it is listed on > LSR page - if the document became an RFC before then it is listed either on > the OSPF page or the IS-IS page. > If you look at those pages you will see that each WG produced a large number > of documents - not sure if it would make sense to move/copy all of that to > the LSR page. > I will let the WG chairs comment on that. > > For myself, if I want to find an RFC, I simply put "RFCxxxx" into my favorite > search tool and it is quickly found. > > <tp> > > Les > > Thanks for that, I see > ========================================== > Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) P. Psenak, Ed. > Request for Comments: 8665 S. Previdi, Ed. > Category: Standards Track C. Filsfils > ISSN: 2070-1721 Cisco Systems, Inc. > H. Gredler > RtBrick Inc. > R. Shakir > Google, Inc. > W. Henderickx > Nokia > J. Tantsura > Apstra, Inc. > December 2019 > =========================================== > Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) P. Psenak, Ed. > Request for Comments: 8666 S. Previdi, Ed. > Category: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc. > ISSN: 2070-1721 December 2019 > ========================================== > the latter being listed on lsr, the former not. mmmmmm I just opened a ticket for the datatracker not returning RFCs in the search results for searches like “ietf-lsr-“. I’d encourage you to do the same for your problem as this is the only way to get it fixed. You can open tickets by sending email to supp...@ietf.org <mailto:supp...@ietf.org>. Thanks, Acee > > Tom Petch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Les > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: tom petch <ie...@btconnect.com> >> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 9:34 AM >> To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsb...@cisco.com>; lsr-cha...@ietf.org >> Cc: lsr@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: RFC8665 >> >> From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsb...@cisco.com> >> Sent: 11 December 2023 16:42 >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8665/ >> >> And there is a link to it here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/ospf/documents/ >> >> Not sure why you are having issues. >> >> <tp> >> >> Because the link is missing, missing from where it would be most useful, in >> the >> page for the LSR WG, the part that lists the RFC, the part that, inter >> alia, lists >> RFC8666 and RFC8667. >> I have come to rely on the page for the WG to link to most of the documents I >> need to reference to review eg ospf-sr-yang. >> >> And it is not there. >> >> Yes there are other links to it on other pages which just consumes more of my >> time to find. >> >> I am thinking that the metadata may be wrong and there will be other >> problems but as yet have no evidence thereof. >> >> Tom Petch >> >> >> >> Les >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Lsr <lsr-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of tom petch >>> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 4:02 AM >>> To: lsr-cha...@ietf.org >>> Cc: lsr@ietf.org >>> Subject: [Lsr] RFC8665 >>> >>> I look in vain in the datatracker for RFC8665. >>> >>> Document search finds it, the data tracker does not list it. >>> >>> I realise that it is not a product of the lsr WG but then neither are >>> RFC9129 or >>> RFC8920 AFAICTand they are listed. >>> >>> Odd; well, irritating to be precise. >>> >>> Tom Petch >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Lsr mailing list >>> Lsr@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
