CircleID

2. Paragraph 38 provides strong support for the Regional Internet Registries with language that says “we call for the reinforcement of specialized regional Internet resource management institutions to guarantee the national interest and rights of countries in that particular region to manage its own Internet resources, while maintaining global coordination in this area.”

I'm sure Paul or Geoff would be able to comment better on this, but the "guarantee the national interest and rights of countries" to "manage its own internet resources while maintaining global coordination" sounds like langugage in support of NIRs - national internet registries that, while operating in each country and responsible for local IP address allocation in that country - still operate under the RIR framework and are affiliated to a particular RIR.  Like the situation in Japan, China, Korea etc today.

Now NIRs can go two ways - they can (as they were envisaged) serve as a convenient local POC for local ISPs / internet operators to get IP space allocated, where they can speak to people in their own language and pay in the local currency ..

OR, especially given this new wording, they can reinvent themselves so that have much more control over local IP allocation policies, and possibly become statutory government entities that are the mandatory point of contact for IP address allocation in the region.  For an example of how such an entity can be set up, there's the example of Korea's NIDA

http://www.ittimes.co.kr/en/node.asp?em=M&mcode=200510&idx=733
http://www.apnic.net/ec/minutes/20040831.html

The IGF and its recommendations are not binding on ICANN's various policy making bodies.  This is the area for new skirmishes next year.

The GAC has representatives from vaious governments. And so does the proposed IGF.

There is little or nothing that stops various governments from nominating representatives to GAC who will put forward the same points of view that are put forward in the IGF.

As for dedicated players getting all the clout in ICANN - that's the way things work in any international process.  A few people will be aware enough of what is going on to participate actively in the process and gain any power that they may have that way. 

If on the other hand the player doesnt know or care what is going on, and is simply on the ICANN (or ITU, or whatever) circuit because Vancouver, or Geneva or other cities he gets to visit are much nicer than his home city ... much can pass him by without his knowing or caring about it.

In other words, Ram - what part of ICANN actually stops someone from becoming a dedicated player if he wants to (and especially if he has the sort of clout that representing his country's government gives him)?

In other words, Ram - what part of ICANN actually stops someone from becoming a dedicated player if he wants to (and especially if he has the sort of clout that representing his country’s government gives him)?

<grin> My point exactly.  Hence my expectation of coming battles.