>> NEW: >> Appeals against protocol parameter registration decisions and >> unreasonable delays in such decisions can be made using the normal >> IETF appeals process... > > That won't work without defining "unreasonable". I think it will, because I think that in most cases the registrants and the DEs and/or IANA do engage in reasonable consideration of delays, but that once we get to a point where the DEs and the registrant are sufficiently at odds that the registrant feels the DEs are being unreasonable, by whatever definition, and explanations aren't being accepted, it's time to get an AD involved and to let the DEs get back to the other work they're doing. We'll never be able to define "unreasonable", but we will know such a situation when we see it. In any case, I think I would change it to this: NEWNEW Appeals against protocol parameter registration decisions and unreasonable delays in such decisions can be made using the normal IETF dispute resolution process, including escalation to an appropriate Area Director, and possible a formal appeal... (...keeping in mind that 2026 specifies that formal appeals start with the full IESG, but that one should start by dealing with the responsible AD first.) Barry