IP: ITU interest in Internet

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

Strategic Policy and Plans

Committee 5 examined two proposals on the issue of Internet governance: one from European countries and one from 
Asia-Pacific countries. The success of the Internet has resulted in a growing demand for domain names which has shown 
the limits of the actual assignment system (especially in the .com domain, where a number of jurisdictional and 
commercial problems appeared) and the need to set up a new system. Reiterating the fact that the development of 
Internet must be essentially market-led and driven by private initiative, the European proposal also stressed the need 
for the future system of registration, allocation and governance of Internet domain names to equitably balance the 
interests of all stakeholders, in particular businesses and consumers and not to privilege any country or region of the 
world to the detriment of others.

The proposal also emphasizes the role of governments as being one to provide a clear, consistent and predictable 
framework, to promote a favourable environment in which global information networks are interoperable and widely 
accessible to all citizens, to ensure adequate protection of consumer and user interests and to preserve a fair 
competitive environment among companies or organizations responsible for Internet resources allocation. Against this 
background, the European proposal requests the Secretary-General to take an active part in the international 
discussions on Internet governance, to participate fully in related international initiatives and to increase awareness 
at national level among all interested non-governmental parties, encouraging them to take part in Internet governance 
entities.

The Asia Pacific proposal highlights the growing need to set new norms and a new framework for the management of 
Internet given that it has evolved from a network monopolized by a limited number of nations to a worldwide basic 
telecommunication infrastructure. APT considers that problems such as policy, technology, commercial and service 
aspects, contents, etc need to be addressed. In a draft resolution tabled at the Conference, the ITU Secretary-General 
was asked to form and manage an expert team under the ITU to prepare a comprehensive report on how to deal with the 
challenges for the ITU under the international management system, the dramatic increase in information and 
communication services provided through the Internet and the many changes the Internet has brought about in the way we 
produce and obtain information. That report would be submitted to Council as soon as possible for its review and 
adoption of follow-up measures to facilitate its implementation.

The discussions that followed pointed to a general agreement on the need to involve the ITU in Internet affairs in 
general and governance issues in particular. Some delegations felt that the problems associated with the domain name 
issues were only legal in nature whereas others were of the opinion that they were of a policy and regulatory 
character. Many were considering only the technical aspects, advancing the building out of the GII through spectrum 
allocation, standards-setting and advocacy and development in developing regions. Others however felt that useful 
technical work was indeed being addressed already by the ITU but that very important factors which were of a policy 
nature were being overlooked. 

While concerns were also expressed on the possible duplication of work between the ITU and other organizations if 
careful consideration of what was already well managed was not clearly identified at the outset, others felt that the 
ITU should be a central point to ensure that Internet remains a global resource not dominated by any organization, 
entity or country. In any event, most felt that indeed, the ITU had a role to play. A general consensus emerged in 
favour of the European proposal in that it addressed the fundamental management of the ITU and outlined a broad 
approach on how governments should become involved in the Internet. Committee 5 therefore decided therefore to take a 
cautious approach and tasked a working group (5/7) under the chairmanship of Germany to consider the European and 
Asia-Pacific proposals and a Canadian proposal concerning a possible study on the issues associated with electronic 
commerce and prepare a draft resolution that would take account of the comments made and the objectiv
es put forward in the discussion. At the request of the US, the working group would possibly dissociate domain names 
from other Internet issues.

Another resolution on how to cope with the decreased use of the international telex service was submitted by Korea and 
adopted. The resolution requests the Secretary-General to survey the decrease in the use of the international telex 
service and investigate the question of when it will become possible for the international telex service to be replaced 
by new means of telecommunication.

The Committee also adopted a Resolution on telecommunications in the service of humanitarian assistance, following the 
Valletta Declaration of the World Telecommunication Development Conference held in 1998. The resolution instructs the 
Secretary-General to work with the UN Emergency Relief Coordinator on the development of practical arrangements for the 
implementation of the Tampere Convention adopted in June 1998. The aim of the Convention is to provide 
telecommunication resources for disaster mitigation and relief operations. The Resolution also urges countries to 
endorse the Convention on Emergency Telecommunications through its ratification, acceptance, approval or final 
signature.

Finally, Committee 5 decided that the proposal by a group of Arab States to set up a policy and regulatory study group 
in the Telecommunication Standardization Sector, although valuable, was overlapping with the work already carried out 
in other parts of the ITU, in particular with Study Group 1 of the Telecommunication Development Sector. The 
discussions were therefore postponed sine die, leaving it to the co-authors to review their proposal accordingly or to 
take up the matter in Plenary if considered necessary.
=================================================================
If you are using any email address other than vcerf () mci net,
please change your address book to use that address exclusively.

See you at INET'99, San Jose, CA, June 25-29,1999 
http://www.isoc.org/inet99/