[docs] [issue19180] some RFC references could be updated

Georg Brandl report at bugs.python.org
Sun Oct 6 13:07:47 CEST 2013


New submission from Georg Brandl:

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
Betreff: [docs] some RFC references could be updated
Datum: Mon, 20 May 2013 22:37:53 -0400
Von: Sean Turner <turners at ieca.com>
An: docs at python.org

Hi,

Just starting to learn python and have noted that at the bottom of this
page:

http://docs.python.org/3/library/ssl.html

There's a couple of out of date references:

0) RFC 1750 has been been obsoleted by RFC 4086 so maybe this is a
better reference (and I prefer the datatracker view as opposed to the
tools view):

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc4086/

Same could be done on this link:

http://docs.python.org/3.4/library/ssl.html

1) RFC 3280 has been obsoleted by RFC 5280 so maybe:

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5280/

Same could be done on this link:

http://docs.python.org/3.4/library/ssl.html

2) RFC 4366 has been obsoleted by RFC 6066 so maybe:

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6066/

On http://docs.python.org/3.4/library/ssl.html you could probably just
drop the reference and change in the ssl.HAS_SNI section.

3) The link to TLS seems broken maybe just point to:

TLS 1.0 http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc2246/
TLS 1.1 http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc4346/
TLS 1.2 http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5246/
SSL 3.0 http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6101/

Actually the same link is broken on:

http://docs.python.org/3.4/library/ssl.html

4) (this is a shameless plug) Might be worth adding a reference in the
ssl.PROTOCOL_SSLv2 section that points to:

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6146/

----------
assignee: docs at python
components: Documentation
messages: 199069
nosy: docs at python, georg.brandl
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: some RFC references could be updated

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue19180>
_______________________________________


More information about the docs mailing list