What's worked best about ICANN: The Address Supporting Organization. Given the pre-existing structure of the Regional Internet Registries, it was a simple matter for the addressing community to come together in the ASO. Having done so, though, they've operated with little muss or fuss, and elected three top-notch Directors to the Board: The ASO directors are highly well-respected folk, with long-term and extensive Internet technical experience.(posted 8904 days ago)What's worked least about ICANN: The Domain Name Supporting Organization. This was an experiment in self-organization for a ommunity that had no pre-existing structure or coherence. It didn't work. The constituency structure (giving equal votes to official representatives of [1] ccTLDs; [2] businesses; [3] trademark interests; [4] ISPs and backbone providers; [5] nonprofit organizations; and [6] .com/.net/.org registrars, and giving 1/3 of a vote to NSI), in no way mirrors the domain name community. It simply parcels out seats at the table to those interests who were politically powerful enough to get them when the structure was drawn up. There's no reason why each of these groups should have equal votes (much less, I suppose, why business/trademark interests should have double votes). The Names Council illustrates the Peter Principle in action (in any hierarchical structure, people tend to be promoted up to their level of incompetence). It has rather more than its share of hangers-on and hired guns, and nearly everyone involved sees his role as representation of his constituency's narrow economic interests. Unfortunately, the structure is now too well-established to junk.