[rfc-i] [xml2rfc] [Tools-discuss] xml.resource.org is up again

Tony Hansen tony at att.com
Wed May 28 08:00:08 PDT 2014

On 5/28/14, 3:31 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>> Is there a preference of what should *should* be used in the future?
> +1.  Toolmakers need a clear statement of direction that either
> 1) the DNS for xml.resource.org is now under IETF control
> 2) we are migrating to ____ (xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org, xml2rfc.ietf.org???)

Because of the recent DNS changes for xml.resource.org, and the magic of 
redirection, the DNS for xml.resource.org is essentially under IETF 
control. Not 100%, but close enough. (xml.resource.org is now a CNAME 
pointing to a name under ietf.org that we control.)

We now have the time to think about what name or names we REALLY want to 
use for the future for where these tools should live.

Underneath xml.resource.org, we have:

     tools for generation of RFCs in various formats from the xml2rfc 
     bibliographic entities for RFCs, internet drafts, and documents 
from some other SDOs
     tools for generating xml2rfc documents
     possibly other items I don't remember right now

Some suggestions are that we use either xml2rfc.ietf.org or 
xml.ietf.org. Another suggestion is that these should really be under 
rfc-editor.org, as in xml2rfc.rfc-editor.org or xml.rfc-editor.org.

Another suggestion is that everything should not be bundled together 
under one domain name. For example, split up the bibliographic entities 
across multiple domains. (I.e., RFCs could get their bibliographic 
information from rfc-editor.org, and I-D's could get their bibliographic 
information from ietf.org.)

     Tony Hansen

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list