[Chapter-delegates] [MemberPubPol] ISOC response to the NTIA's call for comment on the USDoC- ICANN MoU

[Vittorio Bertola]

Hello,

please find my comments below. I think it is a reasonable text, even if
it only addresses a few of the open issues, and is silent on others. (I
would have liked to see ISOC speak in favour of a bigger role for end
users inside ICANN, in opposite of the present hegemony by the industry
in all decision-making structures, but I am afraid that ISOC-HQ will
never want to put forward such a bold position against its own
fee-paying organizational members...)
Anyway:

Matthew Shears ha scritto:
> 1) Building and clarifying relationships
> 
>  
> 
> ISOC has always supported ICANN and the role ICANN plays in the
> collaborative Internet model.   ICANN is an essential organization among
> those that manage and administer the Internet on a day to day basis.
> 
>  
> 
> We welcome ICANN's efforts to improve how it interacts with governments
> through the Government Advisory Council and to working to be more responsive
> to the needs of its various constituencies. 
> 
>  
> 
> Going forward, ISOC feels it is key that the NTIA better define - and limit
> - the role it or any government agency (US or other) plays in ICANN
> oversight.

I think I understand the concept, but I would suggest that you find a
diplomatic way to rephrase the sentence: it is quite rude to ask a USG
agency to limit the role that other governments play, it is like
assuming the USG has the unilateral right to decide what other
governments can or cannot do - something that will hurt all other
countries. It might, well, propose or push a certain point of view,
promote the position in the appropriate venues, etc... but not "limit"
at the present indicative form of the verb.

> 2) Defining roles and responsibilities
> 
>  
> 
> In addition to further limiting its own role, the NTIA should recognize that
> ICANN's current scope is appropriate and should not be expanded.  
> 
>  
> 
> ICANN should remain focused on those functions that are necessary to be
> performed centrally at the global level and that are materially important to
> the continued success of the Internet.  ISOC would suggest, for example,
> that operational authority over the DNS root name server system through
> formal arrangements with the root name server operators is not desirable. We
> believe that the current distributed and redundant way of operating the root
> name servers by a dozen independent organizations is highly successful.
> 
>  
> 
> ISOC also regards the calls for more heavyweight governance inside of ICANN
> and for replacing ICANN with international structures misplaced.  Such moves
> would merely increase end-user costs and creates structures that will resist
> the deployment of improved, innovative and evolutionary technologies.  

Here I agree with the comments already made by others - you should
remove the mention of internationalization. By the way, I think that
ISOC should be in favour of giving ICANN an international form (not
"replacing it" with something else, of course!).
-- 
vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<-----
http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...