Dear all, My apologies again for being unable to attend the call synchronously due to timezone challenges. I just want to add to the discussion on question (a6) that considering that the recommendation already states that backward compatibility MUST be supported by future RZLGRs, I don't see why we should tolerate a case where the RZLGR is not backward compatible. I don't believe we need to consider grandfathering existing TLDs if future RZLGRs MUST be backward compatible with existing versions of the RZLGR. Regards, Tomslin