From: "Lorenzo Colitti" <lorenzo@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 6:05 AM > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > the IETF and 6man absolutely have the ability to change the standard, > > > but it should follow the proper process: write a draft, get consensus, > > > > that is the process we are currently in. but there seems to be serious > > disagreement over the draft. > > > > AIUI the goal of the process is to reclassify the current specification. > That severely restricts the types of changes that are possible. That is the > basis on which this document gained WG consensus and reached IETF last call. Well yes and no. Reclassification means that the document has to be made clear and error-free, erratum-less and I see that as valuable regardless of the subsequent classification - look at the change log and you will see the amount of value added. By now, I sense that the consensus to make this a standard is wanting, that we need to make a technical change that is inconsistent with reclassification so we should make that change along with all the other good things that are there already and recycle it at its current level. Tom Petch > If we want to say that we're no longer reclassifying the current > specification but are instead opening the door to bigger changes, then the > document should go back to the WG for further work because the existing WG > consensus was based on the stated goal of reclassifying the document. >