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

[Oscar A. Robles-Garay]

Vittorio,

And from your point of view, who should pay for that End User 
participation inside ICANN?
Who do you think is interested in the ICANN matter (as end user) ?

Oscar

At 02:53 AM 7/4/2006, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
>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...
>
>_______________________________________________
>Chapter-delegates mailing list
>Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates