NOT "inciting to riot" (was: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard)

[Keith Moore]

> Yes, precisely - there were two subthreads, one subthread that I would
> expect during Last Call ("you have normative references that aren't
> standards-track") and one that I would have hoped would NOT be
> taking place during Last Call ("this is dumb, not useful, ..."). 

If it were a WG document presumably the WG would have done that level of
vetting.  But this seems to be an individual submission. 

> It was not at all clear to me what language we would point to (2026 or
> otherwise) to support a decision not to standardize "IP over MIME"

I think there's plenty of leverage in 2026 to justify not standardizing this. 
But it's probably also the case that there's a lot of thinking regarding
scope/applicability of IETF standards that isn't currently written down.

Note that this is really isn't a question of whether "IP over X" is within
IETF's scope to standardize (it certainly is), but rather, a question of
whether IETF has an obligation to standardize every reasonably complete "IETF
over X" proposal, no matter how limited its applicability.