Hi Tim,

you can not seperate the issue from the players. There are some issue where you need primarily ideas. This is good for individuals. There are issue where you need mechanisms. This is better for institutions. Institutions are build by individuals.  As Avri has said, IETF has no Membership. Individuals are coming together and agreeing via rough consensus on non-binding RFS which constitute code respected by a majority of Players on a voluntarily basis. And it works. 

There is no clear understanding about the relationship between institutions and individuals in the MS model. I remember the At Large election, based on "individual members". Later we had discussion about "institutional" and "individual" membership in the RALOs. IETF is indeed "individual". Hubert Schöttner, the German GAC member, came to the IETF Meeting in Berlin as "individual". This is very ok. The RIRs have a membership model. Members have to pay a fee. Their members are non-governmental institutions. RIPE NCC (and other RIRs) have extensive workshops with governments. Many governmental experts go to RIRs Meetings and they are very welcome. 

Again, there is not "one size fits all model" for MS. The specific model has to build by the involved players around the issue in a bottom up open, transparent und inclusive way. And we learn from our mistakes. Nothing is perfect. ICANN 2.0 was better than ICANN 1.0. ICANN 2.5 (which we will get after the transition) is better than ICANN 2.0. But has to be further enhanced towards ICANN 3.0.

Wolfgang

 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: McTim [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Gesendet: Do 22.09.2016 23:29
An: Kleinwächter, Wolfgang
Cc: NCSG-DISCUSS
Betreff: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] AW: [NCSG-Discuss] IANA
 
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:02 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Avri:
> "..there is no multistakeholder model without governments,...."
>
> Wolfgang:
> I see four models
> 1. ICANN model (with governments in an advisory capacity)
> 2. WSIS model (with non-governmental stakeholders in a consultation process)
> 3. IGF model (all stakeholders on equal footing with no decision making capacity)
> 4. NetMundial model (all stakeholders on equal footing with limited decision making capacity)
>
> RIRs and IETF are special cases, open to everybody but too Special.


Too "specialised" you mean?

I see them as the definitive "Best Practices".

Regards,

McTim


>
> Interesting experiences emerge in some countries at the national Level.
>
> Lets wait and see what Fadis "many little ICANNs" will produce.
>
> We are still in an early phase. There is no "BEST practice", but there is a growing number of "good practices".



-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel