When the status change document is published, the metadata for RFCs 4405,
4406, and 4407 will point to the status change document, as you request
below.
The RFC production center has a database of documents that they use to
produce the indexes and per-RFC web pages. I know something about it
because I added DOIs to it. That database has slots for one RFC to
obsolete or update another, which show up in those indexes and web pages.
They don't point to the datatracker or arbitrary URLs. One of the reasons
we have tiny historicizing RFCs like 7805 and 7142 is to leave breadcrumbs
to the RFCs that they affect.
For that reason I have a lot of sympathy for Klensin's preference for a
small RFC that contains the paragraph from the datatracker. At a minimum,
we should file an erratum on 6686 so it obsoletes 4405-4407 and that
goes into the indexes and web pages.
R's,
John
PS: For anyone who's about to argue that it's odd for our processes to
depend on an old database managed with PHP scripts I wouldn't disagree,
but I don't think a rewrite is on the schedule any time soon. It does a
lot of other stuff coordinating RFC production and it works well enough
for its main purposes.
