In any case, my "proposal" is that ICANN impose responsibility along
with authority: as a simple example (restricted just to address space
assignment), it could establish an AUP that RIRs would have to comply
with to keep their assigned space - and then enforce it (this step is
not optional, or the fix won't actually fix anything).
Sadly, you have misunderstood the policy development process. IANA
does not set policy and nor does the RIPE NCC.
IANA (or perhaps ICANN; I'm not entirely clear where the boundaries
between them lie) *has* to. They have been given the authority; they
have to take the responsibility - or we have the kind of mismatch I
wrote about in the quote above. When they delegate authority, such as
by assigning address space to RIRs, they have to impose corresponding
responsibility, or, again, we have a mismatch.
If they - IANA/ICANN - accept the authority but not the
responsibility,
as you seem to be saying they have, they system will break. Is
breaking, in the case of the Internet, and will break worse and worse
until the mismatch is fixed.
Sitting on their thumbs waiting for someone else to solve the problem,
which is what I see them doing, is *not* a responsible thing for
ICANN/IANA to do here. If this is being done because that's what the
procedures in place call for, then the procedures themselves are
broken
and need to be fixed.
