The second is the side point I raised with Margaret: in the
general case of "things in specifications", removing something
from a specification does not mean that someone can still use
it. Deprecation protects such a usage, but removal does not.
Scott's posting made a distinction between adding and removing
features, lumping site-local deprecation into the "removing
features" category. I echoed his terminology.
I agree with you that there is a difference between simply
removing a feature (which might cause serious backwards
compatibility concerns, and could be quite irresponsible in
some cases) and carefully deprecating a feature (while considering
the affects on current implementations and preserving backwards
compatibility). In the IPv6 site-local case, the decision was made
to deprecate site-local addresses, and that is what we are working
to do. The proposals currently on the table reserve the current
site-local prefix, so that it will not be reallocated by IANA.
Fred, I hope that this resolves your technical concern about
this particular case, and I apologize for not making this
distinction clear in my response to Scott.
That is actually not the
subject of either appeal, and should not enter into the discussion of
either appeal,...
As far as I know, there is only one appeal currently open
regarding this subject.
Margaret