<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000; font-size:10pt;"><br><br>Greetings, all,<br> Thank you for the voices recently who have suggested a more pertinent conversation here that deals with the critical movements of the day with regard to internet "governance" and not just the ethereal wanderings to define elusive terms. The discussion on net neutrality as a concept might well take place on a couple of lists that deal exclusively with this issue and actually lobby and work for changes in their respective areas in this regard. Perhaps we can get a few definitions from them of net neutrality to save us from re-creating this wheel and allow this broader-missioned group to look at the more challenging issues that stand to radically change how the internet works and is administered. Personally, as much as I distrust and dislike ICANN and the way the US DOC has handled things, I am FAR more afraid of how the UN would handle it. ICANN gladly accepts lots of money for practically no service rendered in domain registration and such and promptly spends it all on themselves but the UN has proven it will even subvert money intended to feed the poor and displaced and use that to plan renovation of their headquarters and provide lucrative oil contracts to their friends and family. Of the two, we are better off with ICANN. <br> But we should not be satisfied, just because it is better than the alternative, we need to strive to make the Internet BETTER than any current plans hold for it. That means thinking outside the boxes ICANN and others try to keep our focus within. Let's look first at what the internet really needs to be better, THEN see if ICANN can play a positive role in that. By looking only to how to fix ICANN, we are wasting a lot of good energy and potential answers to major questions that might really make a positive difference. I think that if we come up with a way to do things right and get the world behind it, ICANN and others will be rushing to get in front of the train, we will not have to persuade them, they will fall in line to avoid the dreaded "irrelevence" that so many predict for them on the current path. I think they can not see outside their box. We can play a role by seeing more broadly and thinking creatively. That is more a service to our world than arguing how to make ICANN more transparent or neutral, or whatever the catch phrase of the day may be.<br> One of those issues is and will more clearly in time to come, coordinating the varrious root systems to avoid collision in the namespace. One does not need to like or respect any other root systems to understand that they do and will exist, and soon in greater number and strength. We need to look at how to protect the very foundation of what makes the internet address system work thus far, that is being challenged more and more.<br> There are many other issues, as well, of course, but this is one my organization is concentrated on and why I am here, to keep that concern before those who need to care...<br><br>Enough said...<br><br>-Karl E. Peters, President<br>Top-Level Domain Association, Inc.<br></span></body></html>