That website misrepresents the RFC in a way that I can only describe as deliberate and egregious. To quote the RFC itself, "This document is not an Internet Sta

That website misrepresents the RFC in a way that I can only describe as deliberate and egregious. To quote the RFC itself, "This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes." In other words, someone had an interesting and possibly good idea, and did the non-trivial to get it published as an RFC (getting even informational RFCs take considerable effort) and now someone (else?) is trying to misrepresent its status. As said in another comment, "nothing burger". Also, {click,flame}bait.