From: John C Klensin <john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com>
My problem here, which I hope was clear from
the note from which you quoted, is that a request/document in
the second category was proposed for Standards Track and then
that comments that would be entirely appropriate for a Last Call
on a Standards Track document were essentially rejected on the
grounds that they would require changes to already-registered
RRTYPEs.
This seems to be the only truly controversial point, and it is very
important. The IETF does not promote something to a standard just
because someone (or even lots of people) are already doing it.
It is, however, perfectly acceptable to document it, and even to
document that some other group has anointed it as a standard within
*their* practice.
Dale