This may not be the the grand calamity so many in the press are hoping it is.  E.g. i am reading the NTIA request for public comments on [Docket No. 120214135–2135–01] RIN 0660–XA27 Multistakeholder Process To Develop Consumer Data Privacy Codes of Conduct  and on page 25, in the discussion on the use of multistakeholder process, they list ICANN as a positive model of the model's utility.  Somehow I doubt that would get written while they were planning to ditch ICANN.  I really think this is a case of NTIA slapping the wrist of ICANN to make them do their homework properly. I do not think it is the cataclysm so many seem to think it is.  

avri


On 25 Mar 2012, at 23:40, DeeDee Halleck wrote:

> A failure to secure the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
> contract would severely damage ICANN's ability to implement its address
> expansion programme, the most radical move in the organisation's history.
> 
> http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/23/internet-icann-ethics-idUSL6E8EL9QM20120323
> 
> on the heels of icann's own outgoing president speaking of conflicts of
> interest:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/19/icann_president_calls_out_his_own_board_over_conflicts_of_interest/
> [^]
> 
> and even a past president talking about corruption within icann too:
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20110905_icanns_unelected_crisis/
> 
> -- 
> http://www.deepdishwavesofchange.org
>