[rfc-i] Can the web be archived?
Henning G Schulzrinne
hgs at cs.columbia.edu
Fri Jan 23 07:56:32 PST 2015
My sense is that the number of critical external citations in most
standards-track RFCs is pretty small (probably, less than one on
average). Thus, storing a few hundred documents a year doesn't seem
onerous. As I said, there's no reason to archive IEEE, ACM, ITU and
similar documents, which is probably the majority of our external
citations. Probably no reason to worry about anything but
This isn't really all *that* hard - one folder that's backed-up and a
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:06 AM, John Levine <johnl at taugh.com> wrote:
>>Relying on a search engine may of course be just as unreliable as
>>relying on a link, so I don't know what the ultimate answer is.
> We want something that will provide access to materials in a stable
> way for a long time. That's the definition of a research library.
> Running a research library is (as Heather knows in far more detail
> than we do) a large and expensive job, not one to be taken on lightly.
> It's not a bad idea to include more hints in references so people can
> work around bit rot, and otherwise make it easier to find material if
> it's online somewhere. But I wouldn't ask the RSE to archive
> referenced material unless we had a long term plan to fund and manage
> the archive. The Internet is full of dusty unmaintained archives, and
> the last thing we want is yet another one.
> PS: For an example of a funded archive, see www.inboxproject.com.
> There were too many abandoned archives of spam related legal materal,
> so I arranged with the Cornell Legal Information Instutute to run a
> subarea on spam law and rounded up some sponsors to pay for it. I was
> lucky since the LII already had the infrastructure, and I happened to
> know the guy who runs it.
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest