ICANN 2.0
We're getting close to the end of the public forum section of the ICANN Rome meetings. Two big pieces of news here tie together.
First, the ccNSO has been formed. It's true that it could use more members from around the world, and it's true that the ccTLD constituency still meets separately from the ccNSO. (This is inside baseball - stay with me.) But what's important here is that ICANN has been encouraged to recognize that the country code domains are capable of making their own policies and do not need to be put under centralized control. Most decisions affecting the country codes should be (and will be) left to local initiatives. The ICANN Board clearly does not need to be involved.
The next step will be to allow the ccTLDs to have more say over the IANA function (the part of this operation that changes nameserver information for TLDs) — it's my understanding that IANA won't say what staff does what, how long requests take on average to be implemented, or how much it costs to perform its job. But that's for later.
The second key piece of data here is that Bruce Tonkin gave a terrific presentation about the need for standardized processes (written dockets, timelines) when considering registry/registrar requests for contractual amendments. Now, one response to such a request could be the ICANN Board just saying “Yes.” But the Board is under worldwide scrutiny, and Bruce's point is that ad hockery has not served the Board (or ICANN) well.
The relationship between these two topics is: ICANN is trying to clarify its place in the world (eg, not making local rules for registries) and professionalize its relationship with the contracts it has signed. These are both good steps, and they'll help ICANN survive.