I've been thinking a lot lately about the Verisign v. ICANN litigation, the GNSO process on new registry services, and related issues about innovation in the DNS and IP address arenas. Here are two things I believe:

1. ICANN should never exercise its regulatory authority over registries and registrars in such a way that stifles or slows innovation.  To the contrary, with minimal, light-handed oversight, ICANN should create an environment in which registries and registrars are encouraged to develop new services and reach new service levels.

2. Private innovation should never come at the expense of the public interest.  (And the corollary to No. 2:  ICANN has an important role to play in ensuring that the public interest is served for matters within its purview.) 

The fact that I don't view these as mutually exclusive speaks either to my optimism or my hopeless naivete. Can these two points be reconciled?

The GNSO is thinking about these same issues. I don't think this chart gets the balance right. New services ought to roll out from the service provider, not churn through such a complex flow chart.  At the same time, I have no hesitance in saying that Verisign should have announced what it was planning to do with Sitefinder in sufficient advance of the launch for service providers and others relying on the status quo to adapt. Had ICANN created a lighter regulatory environment, however, Verisign might not have felt the need to roll out the new service with no advance warning.

I suppose this is the start of a public comment I'll submit for the "new registry services" process, but it's not yet fully developed. More later.