%% You should probably cite rfc3445 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-dnsext-restrict-key-for-dnssec-04,
    number =    {draft-ietf-dnsext-restrict-key-for-dnssec-04},
    type =      {Internet-Draft},
    institution =   {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    note =      {Work in Progress},
    url =       {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsext-restrict-key-for-dnssec/04/},
    author =    {Scott Rose and Dan Massey},
    title =     {{Limiting the Scope of the KEY Resource Record (RR)}},
    pagetotal = 10,
    year =      2002,
    month =     sep,
    day =       11,
    abstract =  {This document limits the Domain Name System (DNS) KEY Resource Record (RR) to only keys used by the Domain Name System Security Extensions (DNSSEC). The original KEY RR used sub-typing to store both DNSSEC keys and arbitrary application keys. Storing both DNSSEC and application keys with the same record type is a mistake. This document removes application keys from the KEY record by redefining the Protocol Octet field in the KEY RR Data. As a result of removing application keys, all but one of the flags in the KEY record become unnecessary and are redefined. Three existing application key sub-types are changed to reserved, but the format of the KEY record is not changed. This document updates RFC 2535. {[}STANDARDS-TRACK{]}},
}