On 1 Jun 2026, at 7:42, [email protected] wrote:
I reiterate that interoperability is important for this specific case. This is why the document includes a discussion about the implication of withdrawing a registration.
By that criteria, all of our operational BCPs are for interoperability. That doesn't mean they're standards.
The approach followed here is consistent with how this was handled for other similar efforts
By my quick look, most are Informational.
(e.g., RFC 9122).
Yeah, I would have whined about that too had I noticed. (And note that this was another case where the document said Informational before it went for Last Call.)
As a side note, I don't that we would have this discussion if the registry was created in RFC 4930 ;-)
On this we agree. ;-) Declare yourself in the rough on this one; it's the right thing to do. pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
