The US government has renewed its contract with the Internet overseeing company, The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to manage technical functions for the Internet's Domain Name System (DNS). ICANN has been granted exclusive rights, for no consideration, to run the so-called IANA function until 2011, although the contract is subject to annual review and renewal.
Since its inception in 1998, (ICANN) has been overseen by the US Department of Commerce, which had planned to privatise it. The plan will not materialise nowas the Department of Commerce has renewed its contract with ICANN.
At the World Summit on the Information Society last fall, attendees wanted an international agency to take over ICANN's role. Some countries would like to see UN agency International Telegraph Union to play judge, while others would like public-private partnership.
Internet users from outside the US, including members of the United Nation's Working Group on Internet Governance, have criticised the MoU, saying the relationship puts ICANN under control of the US government. The MoU expires on 30th September.
The non-profit ICANN has managed the IANA function since 2000. In February 2006, the DoC issued a request for information on whether other entities were qualified to manage the IANA functions. The department concluded ICANN was "uniquely qualified to perform the technical functions that are critical to the security and stability of the Internet".
The US said as recently as last month that it wants to give up control over ICANN, which contrasts with 2005's declaration that the Commerce Department would "retain its historic role" in Internet governance. With a new five-year contract in place, it appears that the US government will be holding on to it seat.
John Kneuer, acting administrator of the Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration said, "We have an incentive and a long-standing policy to complete this transition," he said. "But we will take no actions that will [compromise] the stability and security of the Internet." "The historic role that we announced that we were going to preserve is fairly clearly articulated," Kneuer said. "It is the technical verification and authorization of changes to the authoritative root. That is a function of IANA, that is limited, extraordinarily technical in nature, and very explicitly tied to security and stability".
"We continue to be concerned about attempts to politicise the Internet and its management," said Lynn St Amour, whose non-profit organization is involved in Internet-related standards, education and policy. "We believe it's time move to a minimal transitional MoU, where the US government plays a backstop role, where it only comes into play in the event of a serious organizational failure," she said. "We continue to be concerned about attempts to politicize the Internet and its management, and as long as the US has its role in ICANN governance, organisations and other governments have the incentive to try to leverage political channels to their favor."
Others, like Tim Ruiz, vice president of corporate development and policy at registrar GoDaddy.com Inc., said that the US needs to remain involved and that the agreement should be extended. "It's premature to consider ending the [agreement], so we're requesting some extension be made," he said, citing concerns about accountability mechanisms and governance issues.
"We don't believe that it's time to end the MoU, we don't believe that it's time to end the US special role in the Internet management process," CDT's McGuire said. "We certainly don't think the US government having a special role is an ideal situation, but in terms of realist alternatives at this point in time we think it's the best of some potentially unappealing options."
It has also become a worry among some Internet analysts that continued control by the U.S. could result in a fracture of the Internet, where countries break off and run their own domain name servers. However, some are cautioning against an independent ICANN. "ICANN has definitely made progress towards independence, but more needs to be accomplished before a complete transition is appropriate," Steve DelBianco, Executive Director for interest group NetChoice said.Independent of what happens, two main challenges need to be addressed, said Marcus Sachs of non-profit research organization SRI International. One is the security of the DNS, he said. "A lot of the problems we have today are largely based on the fact that the DNS itself, mechanically, doesn't have built-in security," he said. Solving this is critical for increasing consumer confidence and the level of e-commerce activity, he said. The other problem is ensuring the DNS can scale up as the Internet grows in decades to come, Sachs said.
|
