--On Monday, 02 September, 2013 14:09 -0400 Scott O Bradner <sob@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> There is at least one ongoing effort right now that has the >> potential to reclassify a large set of Proposed Standard RFCs >> that form the basis of widely used technology. These types of >> efforts can have a relatively big effect on the standards >> status of the most commonly used RFCs. Do we want to do more? >> Can we do more? > > seems like a quite bad idea (as Randy points out) > > take extra effort and get some interoperability data More than that. Unless we want to deserve the credibility problems we sometimes accuse others of having, nothing should be a full standard, no matter how popular, unless it reflects good engineering practice. I think there is more flexibility for Proposed Standards, especially if they come with commentary or applicability statements, but I believe that, in general, the community should consider "bad design" or "bad engineering practice" to fall into the "known defect" category of RFC 2026. If RFC 6410 requires, or even allows, that we promote things merely because they are popular, then I suggest there is something seriously wrong with it. john