>We don’t want to open things up a bit. I am trying to open up an standard that is closed so tight that nobody has used in almost twenty years. As best I can tell, all those who are opposing me have never, and will most likely never have any interest in presenting a new uri for that registry. That fact should give my opinion at least equal weight in this debate.
There have been new permanent registrations as recently as 2018. That’s demonstrably more open that the original “IETF Tree” requirement, which was impossible to meet.
Ben.
|
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
