IP: Ira Magaziner's London talk...

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

A virtual transcript provided by Tony Rutkowski...


=======================================================
IIR Re-Engineering the Internet Conference
Address of Ira Magaziner
0900-0930 27 Jan 98
London UK


This is a talk about electronic commerce.


This encompasses several important developments now occurring:


- - building out of internet worlwide
- - business to business applications
- - transformation of the retailing of goods
  (20% of all books sold in 1998 will be through
  the Internet)
- - actual digital delivery of services
  (ultimately the largest...financial services,
  banking, games for kids..significant development
  movies, professional services....sell and deliver
  the product)
- - growth of direct marketing and advertising
  (focussed affinity groups)


We need to set the right environment...which will help drive the
economy.  A motivation is a fear that governments would come in and
overtax or strangle the development of electronic commerce.


[discussion of principles from the July 1997 White Paper]




DOMAIN NAMES


Here again, we are trying to follow the set of principles we outlined.


The Internet was originally developed by the U.S.  This forms a
historical legacy.  Management of domain names and blocks of addresses
is conducted under the authority of US government.  This activity
operates under the U.S. Defense Department.  Jon Postel operates under
a DOD contract to conduct this activity.  NSI also operates the root
server system and does some of the domain name registration under
U.S. government contracts.


However, it is no longer appropriate for the U.S.  government to
perform this role.  The existing role should end, and we will be
putting out a draft proposal probably later this week on how this
might occur and seek comment over the next month or two.


Let me discuss a couple of major concerns.


The U.S. government wants to end its stewardship in a responsible and
stable manner.  The current technical management is not viable over
the long run.  Lawsuits have begun because of the assigned monopolies.
Trademark diputes have also occurred.  We must avoid the situation
where 20 judges in different jurisdictions make different decisions.
This would be destablizing.


It is no longer appropriate for a U.S. government agency delegating
these activities.  This activity needs to be more professionalized.
As more and more companies are betting their business on the Internet,
it's administration needs to be more professional and robust.


We need to think ahead and make a viable transition.  However, we
should not move so quickly or radically as to destablize the existing
systems.


The second concern is competition.  These are decentalized systems.
Consumer choice should be provided.  Private bottom up coordination is
necessary.  However, there is a need to have some central activity.
Responsible private sector action is needed.  Government bodies for
doing this are not appropriate.  A private coordinating process more
appropriate than government.  It should reflect bottom up governance.
It should reflect the diversity of users and needs.  It should reflect
international diversity and evolve into an international institution.




The new paper will be on both the White House and ECommerce websites,
and we will be looking for comments from people.  We will look to 5 or
6 weeks turnaround if the paper is largely aceptable.


We need to be bold.  The tendency of governments is to regulate it.
There is no need to set up an ITU or international charger.  That is
wrong.  We need new models of organizations in the private sector that
reflect the diversity of players.


The new coordination group should reflect the stakeholders.


- ---------
Questions
- ---------


EUnet: We look to IANA.  Legitimacy comes from trust.


Magaziner: Yes, but there are significant number of commercial
interests involved now.  We must reach out to those interests and
encompass them in these management activities.  Now the legal
authority rests in the U.S.  government.  As a result, the protection
against challenges is provided by the U.S. government.  We need to
move toward a private non-profit group. It needs to be structured in a
way so that it is robust abainst legal attack.


Cook: What is the timing of transition.  What will be accomplished by
30 Sept.  We have heard about a two year stewardship.


Magaziner: We don't know.  There are polar opposite points of view.
Some say you cannot set a definitive transition, and government must
stick around.  Another view is to get the U.S. government out
yesterday.  We're trying to steer between those two extremes.  We will
look to stakeholders to guide us.  If a new organization could be
created at end of the summer, it could take over in the fall.  The
U.S. government could provide oversight for longer period.  During
this period would the government would not be in charge.


Greisen: How will protection from lawsuits take place.


Magaziner: We must diminish the possibility of suite.  This will be
done through a non-profit corporation with certain purposes and stated
processes.  This can provide significant protection.  It needs
objective procedures and guidelines, for example, who can be a
registry or registar.  This objective process provides protection.  It
may get a lawsuit or two but they will not be successful.


The current situation involving IANA are not clear and the processes
are not objective.  The processes are arbitrary, discriminatory and
unfair.


We have talked to hundreds and hundreds of people.  think there will
be broad community consensus.  will have many views about how to
constitute the board.


There are many groups who want to add the domain names.  Those groups
will argue that they should get up and going.  However, need to create
an objective process first.  Postel could face criminal charges if he
made these decisions and were found to have exhibited biases.  We also
need to endow it financially.


=======================================================