On Fri, Jan 26, 2024, at 10:15, Joel Halpern wrote: > I don't care where the expiry information lives. I care that it exists, > and is treated as meaningful. If all you want to do is what Brian asks, > to remove the date from the draft and replace it with a pointer to the > datatracker, but keep the expiring process otherwise intact, I could > live with that. But it is not what your draft requests. I don't want to sound disingenuous, but I don't think that it does request something else. If you are asserting that it requests that people be able to reference Internet-Draft documents, then I'm probably more confused than you. The draft describes what already happens in that people cite I-Ds. That how it is has been done for ages, but many others, but also by the IETF. We can't request something of the IETF in that regard because the parts the IETF has control over already happened. We can't request something of non-IETF uses. Was there something else that this requests?
