RFC 6014: Cryptographic Algorithm Identifier Allocation for DNSSEC
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document specifies how DNSSEC cryptographic algorithm identifiers in the IANA registries are allocated. It changes the requirement from "standard required" to "RFC Required". It does not change the list of algorithms that are recommended or required for DNSSEC implementations. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6014
- Published
- November 2010
- Authors
- P. Hoffman
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- int
- Pages
- 6
- Also known as
- —
- Updated by:
- RFC 9157
Topics
Referenced by
One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5702Use of SHA-2 Algorithms with RSA in DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource Records for DNSSECUpdated
October 2009
- RFC 6604xNAME RCODE and Status Bits ClarificationCurrent
April 2012
- RFC 6975Signaling Cryptographic Algorithm Understanding in DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC)Current
July 2013
- RFC 4471Derivation of DNS Name Predecessor and SuccessorCurrent
September 2006
- RFC 3845DNS Security (DNSSEC) NextSECure (NSEC) RDATA FormatObsoleted
August 2004
- RFC 3757Domain Name System KEY (DNSKEY) Resource Record (RR) Secure Entry Point (SEP) FlagObsoleted
May 2004
- RFC 3755Legacy Resolver Compatibility for Delegation Signer (DS)Obsoleted
May 2004
- RFC 3226DNSSEC and IPv6 A6 aware server/resolver message size requirementsUpdated
December 2001
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?