said by openbox9:
You're right, the bureaucratic morass of the UN is a lot better
Yea, but the ITU is essentially "the UN" in name only. It's existence goes back over 125 years, long before the UN ever existed. It was formed when telegraph lines started crossing international boundaries. It operates under its own multinational Constitution and Convention. And it already is responsible for alot of the technical standards that the internet depends on. ISOC (the Internet Society, the governing body for the IETF) is a permanent, no-fee member. These days it's considered a UN Specialized Agency like the WHO and WMO, since it's in Geneva and that gives it access to the UN infrastructure.
The Commissioner really mischaracterized how things get done there as well. Far from being a top-down organizations, all the work gets done in Study Groups driven mostly by private companies (Sector Members) with U.S. entities predominant. I think this may be his real agenda. Unlike other international standards groups like IEC and ISO, where the only members are country national committees and every U.S. interest must go through the U.S. government, in the ITU U.S. interests can go directly to the ITU. He sees loss of control.
As for the "bureaucratic mess", don't let the clowns in the General Assembly paint your perception of other, completely separate groups. As I said, alot of the technical communications standards that the internet depends on were done in the ITU. Also, another UN Specialized Agency, WIPO, is in charge of resolving disputes concerning URL ownership, and they seem to be doing that effectively and efficiently.