[governance] ITU vs. ICANN

[John Curran]

On Oct 16, 2010, at 6:19 AM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
> 
> As Karl mentions, the RIR approach does not work in all policy areas. 
> The DNS, for example, attracts very diverse and antagonistic interests. 
> While the RIRs have every reason to be happy that there "narrow subject 
> area" approach works out for the address space, I don't think one can 
> generalize this as a model for all IG related areas.

The "RIR approach" is probably a misnomer, because it's actually the 
"Supporting Organization approach" per original ICANN Bylaws.  It has a
Board which is primarily focused on organization matters and openness of 
the policy formation process, and supporting organizations (DNS, Address,
and Protocol) which "shall be delegated the primary responsibility for 
developing and recommending substantive policies and procedures regarding 
those matters within their individual scope"

While I agree that the DNS realm attracts more diverse interests, there 
is no evidence that holding focused issued-based deliberations for policy 
development (combined with a mandatory need to achieve consensus to recommend 
to the Board) would not have resulted in successful outcomes.  Alas, we never
really gave that model a try when it came to the DNS realm, as the ICANN
Board threw itself into adjudicating new DNS policy matters directly from 
day one.

/John

(solely my personal opinions)

____________________________________________________________
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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t