I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's 
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the 
IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the 
security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat 
these comments just like any other last call comments.

This draft defines a CDNI metadata object to enable delegation of X.509 certificates using ACME protocol.
The actual operations for certificates delegation using ACME protocol are defined in RFC9115, 
which contains a comprehensive list of security considerations.
This document just extends the CDNI metadata interface to enable leveraging the schemes from RFC9115. 

Nits:

1. "CDN" is used in the Abstract without expanding, but it is later expanded in the Introduction. 
   I found this inconsistent: if the abbreviation is well-known, then no expanding is needed, 
   otherwise, it should be expanded in the Abstract. 

2. "CDNI", "FCI" are used with no expanding before the Terminology section, which specifies where the terms are defined.