> On 23 Apr 2025, at 16:16, Peter Thomassen <peter=40desec...@dmarc.ietf.org> > wrote: > > That said, I think it would still be a good idea to invoke the liaison and > ask about ICANN's view on this (potential?) mistake, and how their definition > of "delegation" (to NS? to registry?) plays into this. What's the process for > such an interaction?
I think that'll be a bad idea Peter. IMO it'll just create a lot of hot air and burn too many cycles on mostly pointless make-work: bickering over what its meant by "delegation" for instance. Or developing/extending process machinery that's unlikely to be used all that often. The WG should be able to apply common sense and treat these SUDN requests on a case-by-case basis. Anything fancier can wait until the number and frequency of these requests justifies an exercise in process engineering.
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org
