On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Fernando Gont <fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> (I do also happen to think that it would be better if we waited a decade
> before changing this, because we're only 5 or so years into large-scale
> deployment that will hopefully last at least 3 or 4 decades. However, I
> don't expect many people to agree with me on that, so I'm not trying to
> make that argument here.)
Isn't that actually an argument for waiting before moving rfc4291bis to
full standard?
If you'd wait to change it, why would you want to cast this into stone
now? So that, later you can argue that "it's a full standard document...
so we shouldn't change it"?
I don't see why that argument would carry any weight. Full standards can be changed and updated, too.
What I most care about is that if we make fundamental changes like this, then it's not done as part of a reclassification, and the working group has its say.
Whether the document says "full standard" or "draft standard" is not as important as whether it says the right thing.