⌕ Поиск по атласу

IETF · RFC · RFC6254

RFC6254 · Request to Move RFC 2754 to Historic Status

Request to Move RFC 2754 to Historic Status

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.

Официальная английская аннотация

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.

Связи документа

obsoletes: RFC2754

Официальный источник · 2011-05-01

Полные импортированные сведения карточки
{
  "id": "RFC6254",
  "number": 6254,
  "title_en": "Request to Move RFC 2754 to Historic Status",
  "title_ru": "",
  "summary_ru": "",
  "purpose_ru": "",
  "use_ru": "",
  "full_translation_path": "",
  "full_translation_checked_at": "",
  "full_translation_source_sha256": "",
  "architect_note_ru": "",
  "topics_ru": [],
  "translation_state": "not_prepared",
  "verification_level": "not_prepared",
  "verification_level_ru": "Русская выжимка не подготовлена",
  "verification_note_ru": "",
  "abstract_en": "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.",
  "authors": [
    "M. McFadden"
  ],
  "organizations": [],
  "publication_date": "2011-05-01",
  "current_status": "INFORMATIONAL",
  "current_status_ru": "Информационный",
  "publication_status": "INFORMATIONAL",
  "publication_status_ru": "Информационный",
  "lifecycle": "informational",
  "lifecycle_ru": "Справочный",
  "stream": "IETF",
  "stream_ru": "IETF",
  "area": "",
  "area_ru": "",
  "working_group": "NON WORKING GROUP",
  "source_draft": "draft-iana-rfc2754-to-historic-02",
  "page_count": 3,
  "doi": "10.17487/RFC6254",
  "keywords": [
    "RPS"
  ],
  "formats": [
    "TXT",
    "HTML"
  ],
  "relations": {
    "obsoletes": [
      "RFC2754"
    ],
    "obsoleted_by": [],
    "updates": [],
    "updated_by": [],
    "is_also": [],
    "see_also": []
  },
  "links": {
    "info": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6254/",
    "html": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6254.html",
    "txt": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6254.txt",
    "datatracker": "https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6254/"
  }
}