%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-planned-changes instead of this I-D. @techreport{ecrit-lost-planned-changes-00, number = {draft-ecrit-lost-planned-changes-00}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ecrit-lost-planned-changes/00/}, author = {Brian Rosen}, title = {{Validation of Locations Around a Planned Change}}, pagetotal = 10, year = 2016, month = jul, day = 18, abstract = {This document defines an extension to LoST (RFC5222) that allows a planned change to the data in the LoST server to occur. Records that previously were valid will become invalid at a date in the future, and new locations will become valid after the date. The extension adds two elements to the \textless{}findservice\textgreater{} request: a URI to be used to inform the LIS that previously valid locations will be invalid after the planned change date, and add a date which requests the server to perform validation as of the date specified. It also adds an optional TTL element to the response, which informs all queriers the current expected lifetime of the validation.}, }