Currently, the draft uses the library name (srfi 206 *), which may
have portability issues due to implementation-specific restrictions.

Proposals for a better name include:

(srfi 206 auto)
(srfi 206 all)
(srfi 206 $all)

(The latter to indicate that the library does not behave like a normal
library in every regard.)

What name do you prefer? I would like to make a choice.

Marc