Link changes for lyrics.html page

Hi all

I'm not sure whether patches for the website are permitted here, but
since this is what it is it seems like the best avenue.

Following is a patch to replace a couple of broken links on the lyrics
page to archived versions.  I believe someone brought it to your
attention some time ago, but as they weren't willing to go to the
effort to generate a patch (which doesn't take that much even for a
Winblows user - cygwin or qemu/vmware/whatever) the comment appears to
have been disregarded, and rightly so.

I have attached the patch in case patches are allowed and Gee Mail
mutilates it.  I also apologise if it opens old wounds.

? papers/.new.index.htm
Index: lyrics.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/www/lyrics.html,v
retrieving revision 1.121
diff -u -r1.121 lyrics.html
--- lyrics.html 3 Dec 2010 18:18:55 -0000       1.121
+++ lyrics.html 26 Dec 2010 23:54:51 -0000
@@ -2032,7 +2032,7 @@
 standard solution for this problem.  Despite this legal pressure, the
 IETF community forged ahead and published VRRP as a standard even
 though there was a patent in the space.  Why?
-<a href="http://www.cs-ipv6.lancs.ac.uk/ipv6/documents/standards/general-comms/ietf/vrrp/vrrp-minutes-97dec.txt">
+<a href="http://mirror.switch.ch/ftp/doc/ietf/vrrp/vrrp-minutes-97dec.txt">
 There was much deliberation</a>
 at all levels of the IETF, and unfortunately for all of us the
 politicians within eventually decided to allow patented technology in
@@ -2059,7 +2059,7 @@
 small piece of which is Cisco attempting to use the HSRP patent
 against Alcatel for their use of VRRP.  Some IETF working group
 members took note of our complaints,
-<a href="http://lists.microshaft.org/pipermail/dmca_discuss/2003-April/004702.html">
+<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20061109082106/http://lists.microshaft.org/pipermail/dmca_discuss/2003-April/004702.html">
 however an attempt in April 2003 to have the IETF abandon the use of
 patented technology failed to "reach consensus" in the IETF</a>.
 <p>
? papers/.new.index.htm
Index: lyrics.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/www/lyrics.html,v
retrieving revision 1.121
diff -u -r1.121 lyrics.html
--- lyrics.html	3 Dec 2010 18:18:55 -0000	1.121
+++ lyrics.html	26 Dec 2010 23:54:51 -0000
@@ -2032,7 +2032,7 @@
 standard solution for this problem.  Despite this legal pressure, the
 IETF community forged ahead and published VRRP as a standard even
 though there was a patent in the space.  Why?
-<a href="http://www.cs-ipv6.lancs.ac.uk/ipv6/documents/standards/general-comms/ietf/vrrp/vrrp-minutes-97dec.txt">
+<a href="http://mirror.switch.ch/ftp/doc/ietf/vrrp/vrrp-minutes-97dec.txt">
 There was much deliberation</a>
 at all levels of the IETF, and unfortunately for all of us the
 politicians within eventually decided to allow patented technology in
@@ -2059,7 +2059,7 @@
 small piece of which is Cisco attempting to use the HSRP patent
 against Alcatel for their use of VRRP.  Some IETF working group
 members took note of our complaints,
-<a href="http://lists.microshaft.org/pipermail/dmca_discuss/2003-April/004702.html">
+<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20061109082106/http://lists.microshaft.org/pipermail/dmca_discuss/2003-April/004702.html">
 however an attempt in April 2003 to have the IETF abandon the use of
 patented technology failed to "reach consensus" in the IETF</a>.
 <p>