RFC 4255, "Using DNS to Securely Publish Secure Shell (SSH) Key Fingerprints", January 2006Source of RFC: secsh (sec)
Errata ID: 6267
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Jonathan Neuschäfer
Date Reported: 2020-08-26
Rejected by: Benjamin Kaduk
Date Rejected: 2020-08-30
Throughout the document, when it says:
It should say:
Updated by: 6594, 7479, 8709
RFCs 6594, 7479, 8709 update the IANA registries "SSHFP RR Types for public key algorithms" and "SSHFP RR type for fingerprint types", that were originally described in RFC 4255. These RFCs thus (arguably) update RFC 4255. It would be helpful to have such an "Updated by" noticed in the header of RFC 4255.
Arguably, those RFCs do not update RFC 4255, given that much of the point of having an IANA registry is to be able to allocate new values without updating the original document. I do not believe there is a convention of using an Updates relationship solely to indicate that a codepoint has been allocated from an IANA registry.