==> possibilities include at least:
a) keeping the current tense of specifying a "simple" address
selection, and referring to RFC3484 for more details, but reword
the text appropriately. Remove filtering but keep ordering. It
might require some convincing to make the IESG accept this
approach. (In other words, a simple dual-stack implementation
would not necessarily have to implement RFC3484 to be
compliant/interoperable with this spec.)
There are several reasons why I do not believe
that this is a good choice. We know that the simple
address selection (flag to prefer IPv4 or IPv6) does
not work properly. For instance, it causes situations
where global communication will be initiated using a
local source address, even when a global source address
is available. It also causes situations where hosts
will prefer tunnelled communication over non-tunnelled
communication.
These problems were identified and fixed in RFC 3484,
which is a mandatory part of IPv6.