[lir-wg] ICANN Reform

Reading trough the final implementation report and recomendations
http://www.icann.org/committees/evol-reform/final-implementation-report-02oc
t02.htm I have the following comments:

>B. The structure of ICANN
>(...)
>It is now clear that a purely private-sector body cannot effectively carry
out the ICANN mission.

I would be curious to see the reasoning behind this. My personal opinion
from the IP addressing area is that a purely private-sector body has indeed
carried out its mission without government intervention.

I am not shure government intervention would improve the processes.

With that said, I still belive in transparency and bottom up processes with
open participation, so individuals with the appropriate expertice from
relevant government organisations should be welcomed in the process just as
any other participants.

>C. ICANN process

As a general comment I am fairly confused on wether the processes of the two
domain supporting organisations are part of ICANN and ICANNs processes or
wether they are separate entities with their own responsibility for their
processes.

>E. Participation by Critical Entities

I am curious to know what critical entities are refered to as not currently
participating.

>B. Board of directors
I note that a Director may no longer be removed by the supporting
organisation appointing that director.


>C. Supporting organisations
I note that with the new structure the ICANN board representatives from the
NAMES side now are 2+2 board members while the addressing side appoints 2
members.

regarding funds: I support the approach taken by the RIRs to fund the ASO
secretariat bottom up (directly by the RIRs) rather than top down (ie first
paying money to ICANN to fund the secretariat).

In my oppinion this approach should be taken by all SOs.

Looking forward to hear other opinions on this.

Best Regards,
Hans Petter Holen