Governing structure of IANA.

[maildrop@mindspring.com]

In regards to the matter of establishing the structure of a Board of
Directors for IANA, I would like to propose the following....

The Board should represent the users and providers of the Internet.
After all, they are the ones who will determine the success or failure
of the Net.  And being a open system, the Net is for them, not some
bureaucracy.  However, some form of bureaucracy is necessary for the
smooth functioning of the Internet through political boundaries.

As such, I would like to suggest a structure of a four tiered
representation system.  The Board of Directors should have a fixed and
equal representation from these four groups:

            1)    Government entities regulating communications,
            2)    Internet Service Providers,
            3)    Commercial users of the Internet, and
            4)    Residential users of the Internet.

Each group should have four respresentatives elected by the group they
advocate.  (I chose the number four in order to keep the total number of
Board members managable in a debate.  As well as, allowing each group to
have sufficient leeway to vote for a reasonably broad representation of
their views.)

In the case of Group 1, let the various governments negotiate amongst
themselves to resolve how the process of Voting might take place.

Group 2 should probably have their votes weighted by the number of users
they service.  Although one of the representatives might be specifically
voted upon by ISP's below a certain size, to keep marketing behemoths
from dominating the Group.

Group 3 and 4 will be open to a general Vote over the Internet via
IANA.  Although IANA might have to establish some sort of candidate
selection process where they will 'recommend' certain qualified
individuals to the Voters.  Of cause, every quack or dissenters out
there should also welcome to lobby for votes (you never know what the
market wants).  Probably a candidate bulletin board should be
established where their views and credentials are available to all
voters.

Voters for all these groups should be Registered with IANA and given a
password to verify that no one is casting more than their share of the
ballot via multiple e-mail accounts.

The terms of office for these Representatives should be staggered and
approximately three years in length.  I chose three years as a medium
between the speed of changes on 'Internet Time' as well as provide some
sort of stability and long term view.

Together, these Groups should vote for a Chief Executive Officer of
IANA.  In the case of the CEO, I prefer the European system of a (Prime
Minister's) 'vote of confidence' by the Board of Directors.  I find this
to be much more responsive to public opinion than the American system of
a fixed length term.

As to funding, all these Groups should contribute in an amount equal to
their share of Representation.  In the case of users, probably an
additional surcharge of $0.50 to $1.00 would be added to their ISP
charges to cover the cost of maintaining their share of the
Representation.  In the case of funding, I do not believe a heavier
surcharge on commercial interests is warranted.  As any sort of subsidy
will distort the free flow of market information so critical to the
ultimate success of the Internet.  However!  In keeping with the spirit
of full informational access on the Internet Community, IANA finances
should be posted on-line for all to see and/or question.  Stupidity will
be rewarded at the next voting secession.

I hope my opinions contribute to the Internet Community.

Kam F. Woo
mailto:kam.woo@mindspring.com