On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 9:38 AM Ben Schwartz <bemasc= [email protected]> wrote:
> I think part of the underlying problem here is that using an expired > individual draft as a "stable specification" feels extremely unsatisfying, > even when it is explicitly permitted: > It is not only that it is unsatisfying. As I'm sure you know, when you get up to "Senior Staff" or "Principle Engineer" levels at a big company, "industry-level impact" is usually in there. A consensus RFC (even if Informational) does show this. So there's a financial impact for the authors. Martin has the expiry part here: https://martinthomson.github.io/no-expiry/draft-thomson-gendispatch-no-expiry.html I agree with that draft, but I don't think it will solve these issues. thanks, Rob
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
