<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 13px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><div>Avri,</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks for the clarification.</div><div><br></div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><blockquote id="MAC_OUTLOOK_ATTRIBUTION_BLOCKQUOTE" style="BORDER-LEFT: #b5c4df 5 solid; PADDING:0 0 0 5; MARGIN:0 0 0 5;"><div><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#330033">And I am not lumping them in with any policy decisions currently being made. In fact that is the crux of my question: where will these decisions be made? The PTI Board? If so we should make sure it is reflected in the list.</div></div></blockquote></span><div><br></div><div>This is one of the things I've been a bit wound up about. I've called it "architectural changes to the root system".</div><div><br></div><div>Currently,my view is that that decision is made by NTIA, using processes known only to them (but which, from empirical evidence would appear to include consultation with technical experts at NIST and elsewhere). I had thought a logical place would be the CSC via the creation of an ad hoc, technically knowledgable committee, but I gather my assumptions of the role of the CSC were in error. Personally, I don't care too much who makes the decision, just that the decision is made by folks who understand the issues and the process by which the decision is made is open, transparent, accountable, and well documented (and makes sense, of course).</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>-drc</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></body></html>