1

ICANN2.0 — A Short Cut to the Reestablishment of

National Sovereignty in the Cyberspace

Jia-Lu ChengGoldsmiths College,UOLLuke@gate.sinica.edu.tw

2003/07/21

2

• What is The Internet?• Domain Name System• ccTLD• ICANN • ICANN 2.0• ccNSO• The Future of ccTLDs

Overview

3

What is the Internet?According to U.S. Federal Networking Council (FNC), "Inter

net" refers to the global information system that -- (i) is logically linked together by a globally unique address sp

ace based on the Internet Protocol (IP) or its subsequent extensions/follow-ons;

(ii) is able to support communications using the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) suite or its subsequent extensions/follow-ons, and/or other IP-compatible protocols; and

(iii) provides, uses or makes accessible, either publicly or privately, high level services layered on the communications and related infrastructure described herein.

4

Domain Name System• Importance: A set of distributed databases containing IP address

and their corresponding domain name. From technical point of view, DNS is not a crucial pivot in the development of Internet. From conceptual point of view, DNS is not a new concept in computer science neither. Furthermore, from purely technical point of view, Internet still can work even without DNS. However, for some historical reasons, today, if domain name servers crashed suddenly, then most of communication via Internet will be impossible.

5

Domain Name System• Features: ■ Universal address system ■ Uniqueness of the name of Domain ■ Tree-like hierarchical system• gTLD & ccTLD RFC 920 – Domain Requirement (1982) Using the name of categories of different aggregat

ions of similar organizations and "free of undesirable semantics."

6

The Growth of Number and Percentage of Internet Host

gTLD* US only gTLD# ccTLD ARPANET Unknown Month/Year

No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Total

01/1995 1622747 34 1518808 31 1710288 35 0 0 0 0 4851843 01/1996 3456435 36 2364612 25 3651177 39 0 0 0 0 9472224 01/1997 5829176 36 3696537 23 6620647 41 0 0 0 0 16146360 01/1998 14005613 47.2 5541799 18.7 10044861 33.9 56921 0.2 20417 0.1 29669611 01/1999 21742617 50.3 7184455 16.6 14157734 32.8 47974 0.1 96914 0.2 43229694 01/2000 42685540 59.0 8614753 11.9 20833468 28.8 117501 0.2 146830 0.2 72398092 01/2001 68514456 62.5 9785402 8.9 30960864 28.3 172370 0.2 141337 0.1 109574429 01/2002 93617371 63.5 10453971 7.1 42759123 29.0 281762 0.2 232496 0.2 147344723 01/2003 103654125 60.4 9947636 5.8 51412782 30.0 6387463 3.7 236291 0.1 171638297

*: Including dot-com, dot-net, dot-info, etc., but excluding dot-gov, dot-mil, dot-edu

#: Including dot-gov, dot-mil, dot-edu. Source: Network Wizards, http://www.nw.com/

7

The Growth rate of Internet Host

05

10152025303540455055606570

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

gTLD

Total

ccTLD

US onlygTLD

8

Percentage of the world's domains in the top twenty-five counties

Source: Zook (2000) 'Internet Metrics: Using Host and Domain Name Counts to Map the Internet', Telecommunications Policy 24:613-20.

9

ccTLDs Comparing to other TLDs, ccTLD is not a result of deliberative consideration

or discussion. On the contrast, they were an afterthought, According to Postel:the country code TLDs were pretty much an afterthought to a different process of coming up with the original generic TLDs. A comment was made that some people might want to have names specific to their own country, and it was pointed out that a convenient list of country codes existed (ISO 3166).

Cited from Mueller (1998:93).

10

ccTLDs

However, it is important is not because it is used in the Internet as the country code top-level domain identifiers (ccTLDs), but it decides which country or geographical territory can have its own ccTLD. In sort, it decides which territory can be appeared in cyberspace.

RFC 1591, published in 1994: The IANA is not in the business of deciding what is and what is not a

country. The selection of the ISO 3166 list as a basis for country code top-level domain names was made with the knowledge that ISO has a procedure for determining which entities should be and should not be on that list.

11

ccTLDsFurthermore,

The IANA's policy is to create new ccTLDs only when they are listed on the ISO 3166-1 list.

About ISO 3166-1 list, it was written:The only way to enter a new country name into ISO 3166-1 is to have it registered in one of the following two sources:

● United Nations Terminology Bulletin Country Names or ● Country and Region Codes for Statistical Use of the UN Statistics Division To be listed in the bulletin Country Names you must either be ● a member country of the United Nations, ● a member of one of its specialized agencies or ● a party to the Statute of the International Court of Justice. The list of names in the code of the UN Statistics Division is based on the Bulletin C

ountry Names and other UN sources.

12

ccTLDs Number of ccTLDs Created Per Year

Years Africa AsiaPac Europe LatinAC NorthA Created Total 1985 0 1 1 0 1 3 3 1986 0 3 5 0 0 8 11 1987 0 2 5 1 1 9 20 1988 0 2 5 0 0 7 27 1989 0 2 2 4 0 8 35 1990 2 5 2 2 0 11 46 1991 3 1 0 17 1 22 68 1992 1 5 7 3 0 16 84 1993 8 3 9 2 1 23 107 1994 4 9 6 3 0 22 129 1995 10 10 6 4 0 30 159 1996 10 12 5 3 0 30 189 1997 20 18 1 6 2 47 236 1998 1 1 0 0 0 2 238 1999 1 2 0 0 0 3 241 2000 0 1 0 0 0 1 242

1.AQ-DOM (Antarctica top-level domain), established on 26/02/1992, is not included.

2.These figures are based on IANA ccTLDs Database, and are slightly differentfrom World Wide Alliance's Number of ccTLDs

13

ICANN• DNS Governance in Pre ICANN Era 1970-1993 US Government (SRI, DCA, NSF…) 1993-1998 Network Solution Inc.

• Creation of ICANN 1 July 1997, Framework for Global Electronic Commerce 30 January 1998, DoC's "A Proposal to Improve Technical M

anagement of Internet Names and Addresses - Discussion Draft" (Green Paper)

5 June 1998, DoC's "Management of Internet Names and Addresses" (White Paper)

14

ICANN• Creation of ICANN (cont.) 6 November 1998: ICANN Original Bylaw published. Novem

ber 25, 1998: Memorandum of Understanding Between DOC and ICANN

1999 - ICANN begins to organize the many components specified in the White Paper

• Guiding Principles of ICANN 1. Stability 2. Competition 3. Private sector, bottom-up consensus development 4. Representation

15

16

ICANN• Relationship between ccTLDs, ICANN, and Loc

al Government ■RFC 1591 (March 1994) ■IANA ccTLD News Memo #1 (23 October 1997) ■IANA ccTLD Delegation Practices Document (ICP-1) (21 May

1999) ■Principles for Delegation and Administration of ccTLDs Present

ed by Governmental Advisory Committee (23 February 2000) ■Best Practices Guidelines for ccTLD Managers (24 February 200

0) ■Update on ccTLD Agreements (9 September 2001)

17

ICANN Michael M. Roberts, former President and Chief Executive Off

icer of ICANN, has testified that "The GAC has a particular interest in the relationships between ccTLD delegates and ICANN, since it and its members believe that nations have a sovereign interest in the ccTLD…" Furthermore, he also pointed out that "finding the correct articulation of appropriate relationships between (1) the government and the ccTLD administrator; (2) the ccTLD administrator and ICANN; and (3) ICANN and the government is inherently complex."

Roberts (2001) 'Testimony of Michael M. Roberts Before U.S. Senate Committee o

n Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Subcommittee on Communications',

18

ICANN 2.0 Initiated by President's Report: ICANN - The Case for

Reform (23 February 2002) WHY THE CURRENT COURSE WON'T WORK

• Lack of full participation by Critical Entities – ccTLDs, Root Name Server Operators, Address Registries, Major Use

rs, ISPs and Backbone Providers, National Governments• Overburdened by process

– At expense of effectiveness– Government-like layers of process

• Without government legitimacy, resources– Too many distractions

• Inadequate, unreliable, US-centric funding• Not seen as credible by key stakeholders

– Instead: A (loud) debating society

• A NEW KIND OF PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP

19

ICANN 2.0• The Committee on ICANN Evolution and R

eform (ERC) was established on on 14 March 2002

• ERC's Final Implementation Report and Recommendations was posted on 2 October 2002

• "New Bylaws" as a result of ERC was published on 15 December 2002

20

21

ccNSO

• ERC's "Third Status Report: Formation of ccNSO Assistance Group", 13 September 2002 ERC's "ccNSO Formation: Proposed Revisions to the Bylaws", 18 June 200

• ICANN Board adopted the amendments to the bylaws, 26 June 2003

• ccNSO Launching Group - Call for Expressions of Interest, 9 July 2003

22

ccNSO• Core Responsibilities

• developing and recommending to the Board global policies relating to country-code top-level domains;

• Nurturing consensus across the ccNSO's community, including the name-related activities of ccTLDs; and

• Coordinating with other ICANN Supporting OrganizMEMBERSHIP

• nd constituencies under ICANN.

23

ccNSO• MEMBERSHIP In theory, any ccTLD manager that meets the membership q

ualifications shall be entitled to be members of the ccNSO. Membership qualifications: recognizing the role of the ccN

SO within the ICANN structure, and agreeing, for the duration of its membership in the ccNSO, (a) to adhere to rules of the ccNSO, including membership rules, (b) to adhere to ICANN bylaws as they apply to ccTLDs, and (c) to pay ccNSO membership fees.

• Council

24

The Future of ccTLDs

？