Comment 12 for bug 308181

Nick/others,

RFC 2052, the originally mentioned topic, is indeed over 6 months, but you may
also have noticed my earlier remark that it was replaced with RFC 2782. This one
is on the Standards Track, and STD 1 specifies its status, so rather than making
an RFC look suspicious, I'd like to see a quote from STD 1.
Allow me to demonstrate: it is listed under the heading of
        3.4. Proposed Standard Protocols
And that is a result of a specific action by the IESG [see RFC 2026, sec 4.1.1],
so it definately makes sense to implement this particular feature.

Hope this helps to take your worries away,

Rick van Rein.