Closed HBrock closed 8 months ago
RFC XXXX is new RFC number of --> the assigned numerical RFC value for I-D.ietf-lamps-rfc4210bis RFC YYYY is new RFC number of --> the assigned numerical RFC value for I-D.ietf-lamps-rfc6712bis
https://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers/smi-numbers.xhtml SMI Security for PKIX Module Identifier
SMI Security for PKIX Extended Key Purpose
SMI Security for PKIX CMP Information Types
SMI Security for PKIX CRMF Registration Controls
https://www.iana.org/assignments/core-parameters/core-parameters.xhtml CoAP Content-Formats
@russhousley may I ask for your advice? IANA asked me to specify which references shall be updated to the new RFC 4210bis and 6712bis. Above I provided a list. But I am uncertain if it is correct to update also references to the RFCs, where the OIDs were originally registered. For example I found OIDs with reference RFC 2510, even though the OID is still in use in RFC 4210. I had expected that this reference should have been updated to RFC 4210 back then.
I did a very quick review. This looks correct to me.
IANA wrote: Should those references be replaced with references to this document (this is typical)? For IANA’s purposes, this could be covered by a line that says something like “All existing references to RFC 4210 at https://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers/smi-numbers.xhtml and https://www.iana.org/assignments/core-parameters/core-parameters.xhtml should be replaced with references to this document,” or “All existing references [...] except for the following registrations:”