The work I'm doing on OneWebDay and the work I'm going to do for ICANN are related.  Both of these projects are aimed at preserving innovation and the free flow of information that is the net. 

Two important questions for internet governance debates are "who" and "when."  The ICANN experiment suggests that the "who" is the community as a whole.  The "when" question is about when global rules should be made (rarely) and when local autonomy should be preserved (most of the time).  ICANN's processes (done right) focus work on the few global rules that are needed for the narrow domain of naming. 

That's the reverse assumption from what I've understood to be coming out of the UN/WSIS discussion.  There, most people seem to be assuming that someone should be in charge of the internet, and that someone inevitably will be.  Why assume that?  Why not keep things open, and allow the edges to make rules for themselves?  Connectivity for developing nations should certainly be a focus of global discussion.  But international institutions aimed at "governing the internet" will inevitably have negative effects on the innovation and information flows that make the internet work so well.