Hello,

Alice Best, I was just about to post my comment, when I noticed yours roll in. I may not be

responding directly to the 6 points you raised. However, this is just a general comment on

what may be afoot, especially with the call for review by NTIA coming at a time when there

are concerted efforts far and wide to reign in ICANN. Maybe we need to realize how important

it is first to keep these efforts at bay as a priority, even as we embark on consolidation and

enhancements in its operations.

Much of the huge progress we have witnessed within Cyberspace has been largely due to

the unbridled freedom enjoyed by a borderless internet community working together and

knowing no geographical frontiers. They have dictated the fast pace at which internet has

evolved, in just about under a decade. I must say ICANN to a large extend has exercised

it's mandate responsibly towards the global internet community in facilitating this progress.

What we need now moving forward, is the mandate to be broadened to encompass greater

accountability to it's global base.

The day we will cede back this control to a governmental authorit(y) (ies), is the day we roll

back the carpet on most of these major achievements, which do not auger at all well for future

development. Doing that means opening up to vested interests, whether geopolitical, regional,

sectoral etcetra. We need not allow that.

To date, ICANN has had a free hand in it's operations without undue influence hugely because

many, especially in Govt, including the U.S congress to a greater extend are yet to fully comprehend

this tiny group, what it does, and what it's influence on the global stage is. But maybe, this might

only be shortlived, and no longer the case in the coming days when they wake up to the reality

and demand control.

We need to understand the oversight in place (mandate) and essentially have the same

speedily move towards being delinked from any form of Governmental authority - whether

single, or grouping.

Harry

Thank you Walu and McTim

This will be a good opportunity for Kenyan stakeholders, (we are very active in both ICANN and IGF spaces) to input and wish to encourage more comments online as well as during the meeting on Tuesday.

· In light of technology changes and market developments, should the IANA functions continue to be treated as interdependent technical functions? For example, does the coordination of the assignment of technical protocol parameters need to be done by the same entity that administers certain responsibilities as sociated with root zone management? Please provide specific information to support why or why not, taking into account security and stability issues.

· The performance of the IANA functions often relies upon the policies and procedures developed by a variety of entities within the Internet technical community such as the IETF, the RIRs and ccTLD operators. Should the IANA functions contract include references to these entities, the policies they develop and instructions that the contractorfollow the policies? Please provide specific information as to why or why not. If yes, please provide language you believe accurately captures these relationships.

· previously raised by some governments and ccTLD operators and the need to ensure the stability of and security of the DNS, are there changes that could be made to how root zone management requests for ccTLDs are processed? Please provide specific information as to why or why not. If yes, please provide specific suggestions.

· -Broad performance metrics and reporting are currently required under the contract.\7\ Are the current metrics and reporting requirements sufficient? Please provide specific information as to why or why not. If not, what specific changes should be made?

· Can process improvements or performance enhancements be made to the IANA functions contract to better reflect the needs of users of the IANA functions to improve the overall customer experience? Should mechanisms be employed to provide formalized user input and/or feedback, outreach and coordination with the users of the IANA functions? Is additional information related to the performance and administration of the IANA functions needed in the interest of more transparency? Please provide specific information as to why or why not.

· Should additional security considerations and/or enhancements be factored into requirements for the performance of the IANA functions? Please provide specific information as to why or why not. If additional security considerations should be included, please provide specific suggestions.