Re: Proposed amendment to language of draft-ietf-url-procedures

Ian,

I'd actually push back a bit on the "wide usage" test, because I don't
believe that IETF should commit itself to publish bad ideas even if they
are in wide use.  The most we should commit ourselves to doing, IMHO, is
to avoid defining alternate meanings for URL prefixes in wide use, if
our doing so would cause interoperability problems.

So I would prefer that IESG be given more latitude to reject a URL
prefix registration than to say "it's not widely used".

Keith