Probably this: https://tools.ietf.org/robots.txt > On 14 Sep 2017, at 5:00 pm, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2017-09-14 07:53, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> Hi MIchael, >> That's part of <https://www.w3.org/Protocols/>, which AIUI the W3C sees as a historical view of Web protocols. >> I'm not a lawyer, but I would be surprised and concerned if we started going after sites that had copies of RFCs posted on them for copyright; at any rate, the IETF Trust is never the sole owner of copyright in specifications AIUI, so proving that we had the right to do so would take more work. >> Perhaps the real problem here is that the versions of RFCs that we host don't get very much attention from search engines. While this is no doubt in part because people don't link to them (in my experience, > > Having "proper" HTML should help (in the not so distant future). > >> people will always link to a "prettier" version if available), it also may be because we don't help ourselves; e.g., in my search engine of choice: >> ... > > Well - that's an interesting problem that I'm pretty sure we^^Henrik can fix. Does anybody understand *what* the search engine is complaining about? > > Best regards, Julian -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/