Active defining/rethinking path to active

[Ryun1]

CIP-001 describes here how and when a CIP is to be marked active.

In the past, some CIP's where given the 'Active' status without meeting this criteria. The risk here is that implementors of standards assume something is stable, where this might not be the case. And this is to be expected, since in development, it is often the case that the final product does not match the initial design, this because testing and bug chasing follows only after implementation.

How do we define active in an ecosystem where there are multiple implementations? (i.e. multiple nodes)

[Ryun1]

How do we define active in an ecosystem where there are multiple implementations?

Im not sure we can,
unless a implementation explicitly signals their interest being included in the active status,

[Ryun1]

Dependent on category - is the CIP a part of the core Node?

Do some category require specific paths to active?