Which is again a corroboration of the view held by many Europeans that ICANN is a global experiment to raise a new and necessary international regime while avoiding a clash with the US politicians about an UN-role or another lengthy treaty negotiation.

As long as the US Congress is not willing to step into an international treaty or defer it to ITU or another UN-body, ICANN will stay in place in some form. Just remember what happened with the IAHC and gTLD-MoU. Those initiatives were killed after extensive lobbying by NSI fostering anti-UN resentments.

The negative attitude of US politicians against the UN-style of international bodies is well known by the rest of the world and a fact they have to deal with. ICANN is the prize US citizens pay for the incapability of the USA administration and Congress to engage themselves in any new multi-lateral initiative under an UN umbrella. They have to pay it as the main alternative - cutting the US from the global internet - is even less attractive for the USA's national interests in IT and e-commerce.