RFC 6254: Request to Move RFC 2754 to Historic Status
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
RFC 2754 requested that each time IANA made an address assignment, it was to create appropriate inetnum and as-block objects and digitally sign them. The purpose was to distribute the IANA-held public key in software implementations of the Distributed Routing Policy System. In practice, this was never done on the public Internet. This document requests that RFC 2754 be moved to Historic status. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6254
- Published
- May 2011
- Authors
- M. McFadden
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 3
- Also known as
- —
- Obsoletes:
- RFC 2754
Topics
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?