Hello, While a little late in the review, I have no objection or nits to this draft; I think it's well written, it's problem is clearly defined, and it ties the link between RFC 7001 that it wants to update, with the next steps 9for the update). One comment I'd make though, is that it'd have been nice to have an example ptype, that demonstrates the need/want for the updates/loosening of restrictions on ptypes in the first place. That's minor though, and for readability once published. Kind regards, Sarah