Feeds

Will the internet die in September?

We preview the agenda(s)

Remote control for virtualized desktops

That's what ICANN wants or is willing to discuss. Here is what people will actually want to discuss, however:

.xxx
Stuart Lawley from ICM Registry will be attending and he is still annoyed at the outcome of this debate. As are many governments, who are angry at the US government's direct interference in the process. As are ICANN constituencies, who see the whole issue as just another example of them being bypassed because of behind-the-scenes deals. Internet New Zealand, I see, has vowed to bring it up.

The VeriSign dotcom contract
Again, the contract has not gone through. Rumours are circulating as to why, but the fact is that CFIT, ICM Registry, and many US net companies have used their democratic processes to thwart the contract at the US government level. This is a double-edged sword. One, it is good that people with authority to stop it are looking at the contract and asking the questions that ICANN staff and board have so carefully ignored from everyone else. At the same time, however, it makes a mockery of ICANN running the internet. That such a bad contract is only properly discussed in the corridors of Washington DC is a clear example of what depths internet governance has dropped to. There was an interesting article last week in Business Week by Congressman Rick Boucher in which he outlined why the VeriSign deal should be stopped. But the question is more fundamental than that. It is no coincidence that a 2001 paper by Michael Froomkin, "A Wrong Turn in Cyberspace", has suddenly become required reading. In it, Froomkin, a legal expert in this area, outlines how US government oversight of ICANN violates the US Constitution.

But though these will be hot topics on people's lists, there is one issue that every single person at the meeting should be concerned about:

The United States government's expiring contracts with ICANN, both the Memorandum of Understanding and the IANA contract
The MoU by which ICANN draws all of its authority, and by which the US government asserts control over the internet, will expire on 30 September. IANA is the contract to run the database that specifies where everything is on the internet. It is the fundamental internet directory. The contract that ICANN has to run IANA - granted again by the US government - was extended almost arbitrarily to coincide with the MoU's 30 September expiration date.

What is incredible about these two contracts is that even though they will expire in three months, there has been absolutely no public discussion of them. I personally have asked US government officials and ICANN about what the plans and intentions are, and have yet to receive a single piece of useful information.

This is the last meeting of ICANN before that expiration date. The contract is of such fundamental importance that, if it were not renewed, ICANN would effectively cease to exist and all the planning that has gone into the December Brazil meeting would have all been for nought. The US government refuses to state what everyone knows its intention is: to renew the MoU with itself in overall charge, because that will infuriate everyone that isn't the US government. The US government has also made vague noises about accepting a different company to run the IANA contract, but with that contract expiring in three months, it is more than likely just waving the IANA contract about as another way of fogging the issue so the hard questions aren't asked and it can award it back to ICANN.

This would not be so bad, except for the fact that ICANN was always supposed to become an automonous body. When the US government created the organisation back in 1998, the stated intention was that when the contract expired in 2003 the US government would cut itself out of the internet. But the Bush administration then decided it didn't like this arrangement and reneged on the deal. It looks certain to do the same again. And if there is any doubt that this is not the right course for the entire internet to follow, it is highlighted in the fact that not a soul will discuss it.

So that's the question I will be asking everyone at ICANN next week. Let's hope the people entrusted to oversee this revolutionary medium don't get distracted with the small battles and forget the bigger picture. ®

Kieren McCarthy will be writing stories and a blog from the Marrakech meeting.

Remote control for virtualized desktops

More from The Register

next story
Facebook pays INFINITELY MORE UK corp tax than in 2012
Thanks for the £3k, Zuck. Doh! you're IN CREDIT. Guess not
Big Content outs piracy hotbeds: São Paulo, Beijing ... TORONTO?
MPAA calls Canadians a bunch of bootlegging movie thieves
Google Glassholes are UNDATEABLE – HP exec
You need an emotional connection, says touchy-feely MD... We can do that
YARR! Pirates walk the plank: DMCA magnets sink in Google results
Spaffing copyrighted stuff over the web? No search ranking for you
Just don't blame Bono! Apple iTunes music sales PLUMMET
Cupertino revenue hit by cheapo downloads, says report
Hungary's internet tax cannot be allowed to set a precedent, says EC
More protests planned against giga-tariff for Tuesday evening
US court SHUTS DOWN 'scammers posing as Microsoft, Facebook support staff'
Netizens allegedly duped into paying for bogus tech advice
prev story

Whitepapers

Why cloud backup?
Combining the latest advancements in disk-based backup with secure, integrated, cloud technologies offer organizations fast and assured recovery of their critical enterprise data.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Top 5 reasons to deploy VMware with Tegile
Data demand and the rise of virtualization is challenging IT teams to deliver storage performance, scalability and capacity that can keep up, while maximizing efficiency.
Mitigating web security risk with SSL certificates
Web-based systems are essential tools for running business processes and delivering services to customers.