RFC 2026 [RFC2026] and its predecessors call for the publication of
an RFC describing the status of IETF protocols:
The RFC Editor shall publish periodically an "Internet Official
Protocol Standards" RFC , summarizing the status of all
Internet protocol and service specifications.
The "Internet Official Protocol Standards" document, now as RFC 5000
[RFC5000], has always been listed in the Internet Standard series as
STD 1. However, the document has not been kept up to date in recent
years, and it has fallen out of use in favor of the online list
produced by the RFC Editor [STDS-TRK]. The IETF no longer sees the
need for the document to be maintained. Therefore, this document
updates RFC 2026 [RFC2026], effectively removing the above-mentioned
paragraph from Section 6.1.3, along with the paragraph from
Section 2.1 that states:
The status of Internet protocol and service specifications is
summarized periodically in an RFC entitled "Internet Official
Protocol Standards" . This RFC shows the level of maturity and
other helpful information for each Internet protocol or service
specification (see section 3).
and the paragraph from Section 3.3 that states:
The "Official Protocol Standards" RFC (STD1) lists a general
requirement level for each TS, using the nomenclature defined in
this section. This RFC is updated periodically. In many cases,
more detailed descriptions of the requirement levels of particular
protocols and of individual features of the protocols will be
found in appropriate ASs.
Additionally, this document obsoletes RFC 5000 [RFC5000], the current
incarnation of that document, and requests that the IESG move that
document (and therefore STD 1) to Historic status.
Finally, RFC 2026 [RFC2026] Section 6.1.3 also calls for the
publication of an "official summary of standards actions completed
and pending" in the Internet Society's newsletter. This has also not
been done in recent years, and the "publication of record" for
standards actions has for some time been the minutes of the IESG
[IESG-MINUTES]. Therefore, that paragraph is also effectively
removed from Section 6.1.3.