[e2e] My version of your list...

[Duke, Martin]

After more careful reading, I retract the comment below:

>1) If one purpose is to call attention to those protocols whose status
ought to be 
>updated, I think consolidating "Standard" and "Proposed Standard" into
one letter code 
>obscures important information.  If 1323, for example, is a de facto
standard, then by 
>all means let's list it as a "core specification" but accurately depict
its current 
>official status in the IETF as "P", as a clue that someone ought to
promote to a 
>Standard.

Martin