For the record, I am not confused, don't know of others. You may want to read through the thread before concluding as such. Especially read my response to Greg where I actually referred to CSC/IFRT recommendations as a result of their performance review. Your response would most likely be rhetoric as well considering that you seem to be implying that IETF no longer carry out performance review of their IANA related function. On that same note you may also fault the CRISP opinion on how their second level domains in .ARPA. should be handled. Anyway this does not affect me and its just some inconsistency/ambiguity in the CWG response[1] that I thought I should flag especially based on recent CRISP response to ICG. You are ICG member, all the best in putting things together. Regards 1. You may want to look at the CWG response to the question below: Scope 13) The .ARPA domain is used for special purposes. Please could you clarify whether or not the .ARPA domain will be included in the CSC and IFR processes. Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 Kindly excuse brevity and typos. Is there any reason to believe, even in a wild scenario, that the CSC or an IFR has the remit, authority or jurisdiction to remove (or even recommend the removal) of a TLD (.ARPA or otherwise) from the root? I assume that Greg at least understands the proposal well enough to pose this as a rhetorical question. But in case anyone else is confused, the answer is short and simple: No. The existence of a TLD in the root is a policy decision my within the ICANN or iETF processes, CSC and IFR review only the performance of the IANA in implementing those decisions. Dr. Milton L. Mueller Professor, School of Public Policy Georgia Institute of Technology