Hi Scott,
Yes, I wondered about that. You're right; it isn't listed in the relevant IMR either (https://www.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/museum/imr/). So it was never posted by the IETF
Secretariat.
Regards
Brian
On 22-May-23 11:30, Scott Bradner wrote:
I do not have a copy of that file in my ID directory & I was saving every ID that got published
so maybe the doc was never published as an ID even though it is in ID format. That would
be consistent with RFC 2693 referring to the file and not to the ID.
I also do not find any announcement of such an ID being published in the old item list archive
Scott
On May 21, 2023, at 6:57 PM, Joe Touch <touch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
There was a time before when draft copyright was assigned to the ISOC.
I don’t recall the date, but this seems prior.
Joe
On May 21, 2023, at 1:53 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Is there any reason why draft-rivest-sexp-00.txt cannot be reinstated to the datatracker? This has been done in the past with "lost" I-Ds.
Regards
Brian Carpenter
On 22-May-23 06:34, John Levine wrote:
It appears that Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
-=-=-=-=-=-
-=-=-=-=-=-
-=-=-=-=-=-
https://people.csail.mit.edu/rivest/Sexp.txt is no longer reachable. This is a document I use often in my work so I'd like to have a more stable reference, like an Informational RFC.
Is there any interest in trying to do that?
The Internet Archive says it was last seen over a year ago in January 2022.
I concur with the suggestion to get MIT to resuscitate it, but in the meantime,
here's a copy that's not going away any time soon:
https://web.archive.org/web/20220113221331/https://people.csail.mit.edu/rivest/Sexp.txt
R's,
John
