Re: addr-arch next steps

[Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>]

> thomas, i have been quiet this whole time.  but imiho
>   o the document is poor quality
>   o it is technically controversial
>   o we know that pulling on the thread will unravel all sorts of
>     social and technical manipulation that go back to 1994

Note also, that I'm not opposed to having a serious discussion on
content. But logistically, that will be much much easier if the
current ID is out as a PS. One of the big problems on this document
over the last year has been the unwillingness to consider or discuss
any changes (whether substantive or not) because the belief that the
document was well past being "done". There is tremendous need to get a
replacement for RFC 2373 published.

If we want a serious discussion of content, we need a good 6 months,
at least.

Thomas