[rfc-i] re-rolling the RFCs0001-0500.tar.gz tarballs

Peter Hessler phessler at theapt.org
Thu Mar 19 13:00:26 PDT 2009


That is an excellent reason to re-roll.


On 2009 Mar 19 (Thu) at 12:22:31 -0700 (-0700), Alice Hagens wrote:
> Peter,
>
> Also, we put many early RFCs online in the last year, so the tarballs  
> changed significantly during that time.  See http://www.rfc- 
> editor.org/rfc-online-2008.html for more information.
>
> Thank you.
>
> RFC Editor/ah
>
> On Mar 19, 2009, at 12:21 PM, Bob Braden wrote:
>
>> Peter Hessler wrote:
>>> Hello, I am working on creating a package of the RFCs for offline
>>> reading.  However, I noticed that all of the tarballs are re- 
>>> generated
>>> every week, so the checksums change.  The port framework I use  
>>> verifies
>>> that the source tarball matches a registered checksum, so this will 
>>> fail.
>>>
>>> Is there a reason why the RFCs0001-0500.tar.gz tarballs change  
>>> checksum?
>>> Shouldn't they be static once filled?
>>>
>> It was an algorithmic decision taken a long time ago... presumably it 
>> seemed safer to regenerate the
>> tarballs each time, in case a bit got lost on disk.  But we take your 
>> point, and will consider it the next
>> time those scripts are revisited.
>>
>> Thanks for the suggestion.
>>
>> RFC Editor/bb
>>
>

-- 
There is no substitute for good manners, except, perhaps, fast
reflexes.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list