Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Ah, looks like it was somewhat superseded by RFC 4918, but we’re not going to tell you which parts! How about those extension RFCs? There’s only 7 of them…

This is a major complaint I have with RFCs.

If you want to know the current standard for a protocol or format you often have to look at multiple RFCs. Some of them partially replace parts of a previous RFC, but it isn't entirely clear which parts. And the old RFCs don't link to the new ones.

There are no less than 11 RFCs for HTTP (including versions 2 and 3)

I really wish IETF published living standards that combined all relevant RFCs together in a single source of truth.



Is this true anymore? AFAIK, I've seen "Updated by" (rfc2119), "Obsoleted by" (rfc3501), but that might changed afterwards https://stackoverflow.com/a/39714048


Those notices don't usually point to all RFCs that update the one you are reading. They tend to be more complete on the case of obsolete ones.





Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: