What has changed in the 5 years since we discussed
this is a perception of
 what that mechanism should be.
 
 The alternative to forever enshrining 'endpoint' as a MUST would simply be
 to discuss - in non normative language - the trade off between supporting
 something very widely implementable like endpoint and something like
 exporter. 
No, that won't work. It *must* be something every client and server 
implementing channel-binding would be able to implement *and* offer/use. And as 
of today I don't know of any other channel-binding that can be used everywhere 
(even when using load-balancers etc).
In general, I think we should create security for today, not for a 
hypothetical future. We can always update/depreciate this MUST via a new XEP 
if there ever emerges a channel binding type with the same ubiquitous 
properties.
-tmolitor