Repository navigation
update references to {datatracker,tools}.ietf.org to rfc-editor.org - #2500
Merged
Merged
Conversation
tarcieri
approved these changes
Oct 29, 2026
tarcieri
left a comment
tarcieri
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks. I didn't exhaustively check all the URLs but the ones I spot checked seemed to be good.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Many places reference RFCs by chapter and verse, using datatracker.ietf.org/doc, or tools.ietf.org/ (inconsistently).
www.rfc-editor.org is the official source, and by using the /info link, one gets meta data about document status, sensibly static and cachable, and can even see errata applied.
Sorry if this seems like busywork: just a pet peeve of mine.
I'm also https://datatracker.ietf.org/person/Michael%20Richardson