HTTPBis BOF followup - should RFC 2965 (cookie) be in scope for the WG?

Hi folks,
Answers to this question during the BOF were not conclusive, so I would 
like to poll mailing list members on whether revision of RFC 2965 (HTTP 
State Management Mechanism) should be in scope for the proposed WG.

Question: Should RFC 2965 revision be in scope for the WG?

Please chose one of the following answers:

1). No
2). Yes
3). Maybe (this includes "yes, but when the WG completes the currently 
proposed milestones" and "yes, but this should be done in another WG")
4). I have another opinion, which is ....

Please send answers to the mailing list, or directly to me *and* Mark 
Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>.
And of course feel free to ask clarifying questions/correct list of answers.