[governance] Framework convention

[Milton Mueller]

>>> apisan at servidor.unam.mx 4/20/2007 5:02:26 PM >>>
>Devising a global-governance structure that can have a chance 
>to be useful in any issue other than the now-solved coordination 
>of the DNS, IP addressing, etc. systems is hard, requires domain-
>specific knowledge and depth of thought.

Yes it's hard, etc. And your point about what should be done next
is....? 

Contrary to what you say there are many global governance issues
related to DNS/IP addressing that remain manifestly unsolved. Including,
for example, the legal and organizational status of ICANN, its
representational structures, and the nature of its relationship to
national governments. ICANN becomes the focal point of so many of these
conversations because it is an established, fully globalized regulatory
structure. Various interest groups like to leverage that for policy
purposes. As long as there is no real institutional solution to the
"public policy" problem ICANN will continue to be a magnet for those
concerns. 

>No wonder that the people who deal with [many issues] have 
>gone elsewhere, even for interacting with the recognized 
>experts among us.

Gone where? Actually, more are coming into this space than ever before.
As I learned in several recent speaking engagements, people in many
other issue domains are still surprisingly ignorant of ICANN, IG and the
Forum. Some will become interested when they learn what it is about,
some will not. But an IGF that can't directly discuss ICANN-related
issues is not worthy of the name. 

>Not to speak of the once-held idea that there are a large 
>number of organizations with a claim for relevance in Internet 
>governance which do not comply with the WSIS criteria about 
>which no-one has even started a discussion here.

It seems to me that Bill Drake and others on this list have been trying
to start a discussion of that for the last 18 months. I didn't notice
you helping them. Indeed, I thought you were in the "keep the IGF
focused on safe and innocuous generic themes like access, openness and
security" camp. And it also seems to me that a framework convention or
some other conscious and formal global governance process would be the
best way to address those issues, but again I don't recall seeing you
devote any energies to exploring that approach. 

Bottom line, Alejandro its hard for me to tell what direction you're
pushing in. The tacit tone is that we should all just go home and leave
ICANN and all other existing institutions alone. 
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance