On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Dave CROCKER <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 3/25/2010 1:56 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: >> >> I think that's fine for Informational or Experimental, but this draft is >> seeking Proposed Standard status. I'd like to see the results of some >> implementation experiments at least. > > > I'll encourage the discussion to focus on the expected /benefit/ and the > likelihood of obtaining it. The details of the specification, without > worrying > very much what the associated label will be. > > If the work is pursued in the /style/ of a standards effort, then the result > will have the technical merit th at is needed. Whether it gets that label > now, > eventually or never becomes nicely separate matter.
Section 2 of RFC 3463 has this: The code space defined is intended to be extensible only by standards track documents. Which was the motivation for the status. I'll leave it to the pros how we get there. -- Jeff Macdonald Ayer, MA
