On Apr 12, 2013, at 11:26 AM, Martin Rex <mrex@xxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm currently seeing a document with some serious defects in > IETF Last Call (rfc2560bis) and an apparent desire to have > it Rubberstamped by the IESG (recycling at Proposed Standard). FWIW, I raised the same question during IESG review. It didn't seem like a "serious defect" to me, but it did seem like a strange design choice. I ultimately withdrew my objection after we walked through the problem. If we were doing a clean slate design, fixing the problem as you proposed would be a net win. Given that there are substantial existing deployments, it doesn't look like a net win to me. I think this is really a matter of judgment, not a matter of fact, so while I sympathize that it didn't come out your way, I don't agree with you that the wrong thing happened.