Neither Verisign nor Verizon (& AT&T) were entirely happy with the US position. But they both accepted it. That is exactly the contrast I am trying to draw. Within ICANN, despite its claims to be based on consensus, such an outcome never would have happened. The world would have been divided into good guys (telcos and IETF) and bad guys (Verisign), and the "impartial regulator" would have sided with "the good guys" (i.e., their personal friends).
I don't think the FCC's intention to avoid regulating VoIP was the primary motivator of the US position.
Fear of the ITU, plus, there are simply a lot reasons to let a thousand flowers bloom in this case, even while recognizing, as the US position does, that a coordinated approach may well win out and may well have advantages.
Deference to Verisign? For every one person who shows deference, I'll give you three who consider them the evil empire. True deference to Verisign in this case would have consisted of completely rejecting the IETF-Telco-RIPE alliance and the Golden Tree concept. Indeed, Verisign was so frustrated with the outcome that they basically dropped out of the process for a while. Any way you look at this outcome, it's Verisign 1, its opponents 2.