IP: RELEASE 3.0: ICANN SHOULD LET 'OUTSIDERS' IN

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2001 19:01:15 -0400
> To: farber () cis upenn edu
> From: Esther Dyson <edyson () edventure com>
>
> > BC-ESTHER-DYSON-COLUMN-NYTSF
> >
> > RELEASE 3.0: ICANN SHOULD LET 'OUTSIDERS' IN
> >
> > (Commentary)
> >
> > By ESTHER DYSON
> >
> > c.2001 EDventure Holdings Inc.
> >
> >    One of the monumental side effects of the World Trade Center attacks is
> > how the world has refocused its attention and how organizations and
> > individuals are resetting their priorities.
> >
> >    Some of this is good. All over the world, and especially in the United
> > States, people are turning to their families, talking to their kids and
> > remembering what is truly most valuable to them: the people they love. In
> > business, they are canceling unproductive trips and ceremonial meetings to
> > focus on the most effective use of their time and resources.
> >
> >    But certain aspects of this change in priorities are bad. Some
> > businesses are blaming poor performance (often visible before Sept. 11) on
> > those events. And in some cases, the focus on security issues is allowing
> > organizations and individuals to sidestep or postpone dealing with other
> > commitments.
> >
> >    A seeming case in point is ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned
> > Names and Numbers, the international nongovernment agency tasked with
> > setting policy for the Internet's technical infrastructure, including the
> > Domain Name System. I was its founding chairman (1998-2000), and I am now a
> > member of the At-Large Membership Study Committee (ALSC), which is trying
> > to develop a new governance structure for ICANN that will include a way to
> > represent the general public -- the people who use the Internet -- on its
> > board and in its policy-making processes.
> >
> >    ICANN has just announced that the agency's annual meeting next month,
> > which was supposed to include a decision on the ALSC's recommendations,
> > will focus on security issues. That sounds very nice -- responsive to
> > current conditions and so forth -- but it ends up delaying more pressing
> > issues.
> >
> >    Security is important, and ICANN's member organizations -- technical
> > developers, Internet service providers, address and domain name registries
> > and registrars -- should certainly work together on security issues. But
> > most of what they need to do is fairly specific and beyond the purview of a
> > policy and standards body. ICANN and its members do need to be aware of
> > security issues, but the details -- especially for ensuring the integrity
> > of the root servers, which are the foundation of the Domain Name System
> > (SEE SIDEBAR) -- probably should NOT be discussed in public. Regardless,
> > accomplishing these things requires staff and technical expert time -- not
> > a lot of discussion at the board level.
> >
> >    As for the ALSC, its job is not to impose a plan for how to structure
> > ICANN but to help the relevant community come to its own consensus on how
> > to do so. There are two sides to this issue. In broad terms (ones that will
> > probably offend both sides), there are the "insiders" who think ICANN
> > should be governed by a tight group of experienced, technically informed
> > people, and the "outsiders" who think that because it affects the
> > Internet-using public around the world, ICANN should be governed by a
> > global, democratically elected board.
> >
> >    The second group believes that if the public only knew, it would take an
> > intense interest in ICANN's activities and rush to participate. (The more
> > extreme proponents are convinced that the worldwide media are censoring
> > coverage of this issue, but as I write this column, I know that the real
> > problem is making this mostly technical group and its issues interesting to
> > anyone but a small number of people. Even the outsiders in this debate are
> > really insiders.)
> >
> >    The challenge is that even though the public is mostly not INTERESTED,
> > the public's INTERESTS are affected to some extent by ICANN's activities.
> > Most people are happy to leave the operation of the Internet to the
> > experts, but the decisions of these experts do have an impact on the rest
> > of us -- affecting everything from the reliable operation of the overall
> > infrastructure to the prices of domain names (which have come down over
> > time due to market competition fostered by ICANN) and the policies
> > governing the assignment of domain names (a matter of increasing political
> > and commercial significance).
> >
> >    It is indeed appropriate that the public interest have representation
> > within ICANN, and the ALSC has come up with what it considers a reasonable
> > compromise between the two extremes: ANYONE is eligible to participate in
> > the At-Large Membership and its policy discussions. There will be regional
> > councils to foster involvement and to make the discussions manageable, in a
> > variety of languages. But in order to vote on board members and the leaders
> > of the regional organizations, individuals must own or control a domain
> > name and pay a small fee ($5 to $15) to cover the costs of registering
> > voters and running the election. Total cost should be $50 or less. Since
> > even that amount could be a burden for some people, the ALSC is looking for
> > outside organizations that could help provide funds for people who cannot
> > afford the fee.
> >
> >    Finally, the At-Large Membership would elect six of ICANN's 19 board
> > seats -- ensuring a strong voice but not a deciding one. The initial
> > presumption was that they would elect nine seats. This was based on the
> > notion of public vs. private interests. But a lot of people had problems
> > with that. First of all, the technical people who designed the Internet --
> > mostly engineers and researchers -- are insiders, but in many ways they
> > work in the public interest. Public or private, their main interest is to
> > keep the thing working -- though you might say that they tend to favor
> > stability over innovation, or you could argue that they tend to be
> > wild-eyed and impractical. Regardless, the committee ended up looking at
> > the board as having three sides -- developers, providers (of products and
> > services) and users, the general public -- and tried to make sure each
> > group would be well represented.
> >
> >    But perhaps most important, this compromise is likely to win acceptance
> > from all three sides -- whereas the idea of having the At-Large Membership
> > elect nine out of 19 board seats is not.
> >
> >    In short, the ALSC is focused on finding a solution that will work --
> > not on having a philosophical discussion. Especially in the current
> > environment, with a lot of distractions, we need to come up with a plan the
> > board can adopt.
> >
> >    The real message of Sept. 11 it is that no organization with global
> > impact can operate in a vacuum any longer. Although I would hesitate to
> > suggest that ICANN itself is likely to be a target of terrorists (some of
> > the Internet's facilities might be), it is clear that excluding people is
> > not a good policy -- for ICANN or for the modern world.
> >
> >    At the same time, we don't think trying to build an immediate global
> > democracy -- especially for ICANN, which has a limited scope of activities
> > -- is a practical or desirable goal. We do, however, think it's important
> > to make a real step in the right direction -- QUICKLY.
> >
> >    If ICANN delays too long in letting the public have a say, it risks
> > turning skeptics into enemies. Let's move forward with the ALSC's
> > recommendations. Though not perfect, they represent a compromise that most
> > people can live with.
> >
> > -0-
> >
> > SIDEBAR: A LOOK AT SECURITY
> >
> >    A few words on robustness and security for the curious: The Domain Name
> > System, in particular, and the Internet overall were designed with
> > robustness in mind. Individual domain name servers run in coordinated pairs
> > or groups so that if one is unavailable, the other(s) can continue to
> > provide service. Indeed, the root server system is comprised of 13 highly
> > secure, fault-tolerant machines in controlled environments that are tightly
> > coordinated. They are geographically and topologically distributed
> > throughout the Internet over multiple redundant telecommunication links.
> >
> >    Security of the whole Domain Name System is enhanced with each domain
> > name service provider (e.g. registries) using the most up-to-date domain
> > name software versions designed to fix security flaws as they are revealed.
> > Moreover, there are specific new features that have enhanced their overall
> > security.
> >
> >    So all in all, the Domain Name System is well-protected.
> >
> > -0-
> >
> > SIDEBAR: FOR MORE INFORMATION
> >
> >    If you would like more details about the Internet Corporation for
> > Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), or a say in the deliberations of the
> > At-Large Membership Study Committee, check out www.atlargestudy.org, or
> > write to me (unfortunately only in English) at edyson () edventure com.
> >
> > -0-
> >
> >    (Esther Dyson edits the technology newsletter Release 1.0 and is the
> > author of the best-selling book "Release 2.0." She is chairman of EDventure
> > Holdings and is an active investor in a variety of high-tech start-ups.)
> >
> >    (Questions and comments should be directed to Esther Dyson in English at
> > edyson(at)edventure.com)
> >
> >    ----
> >
> >    Distributed by New York Times Special Features
>
>
>
> Esther Dyson                    Always make new mistakes!
> chairman, EDventure Holdings
> writer, Release 3.0 (on Website below)
> edyson () edventure com
> 1 (212) 924-8800    --   fax  1 (212) 924-0240
> 104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
> New York, NY 10011 USA
> http://www.edventure.com
>
> High-Tech Forum in Europe: 7 to 9 November, Berlin
> PC FORUM: 24 to 27 March 2002, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/