Internet Organizations:A study in political science
Fred Baker
Chair, ISOC
Cisco Fellow
“There are two things you don’t want to see being made—sausage and legislation.”
Attributed to Otto von Bismark (1815-1898)
Organizational Chart
Organizations in the Internet
W3C
IAB IESG
The RIRs
Standards Bodies
Service Organizations
Government Interest
IRTF
Address Prefix Assignment IETF specified structure
of an IPv4 or IPv6 prefix ICANN (historically IANA)
assigns them to Regional Internet Registries
RIRs Develop assignment policy Assign to local NICs, or
ISPs, or edge networks Local NICs assign to
ISPs or edge networks
DNS Name Management ICANN assigns TLDs to
registrars NSI, ccTLD Operators, etc
TLD registrars work with registries to allocate domain names
Domain name holders are on their own
Who makes sure this much works?
ICANN is responsible for the correct operation of its functions
US Department of Commerce Maintains a “parental” finger in
the game Participates in root zone changes
Lots of worried people comment – all the time
Protocol Identifier Management
IETF owns its protocols IAB Charters IANA
IANA (now) assigns protocol identifiers
ICANN current operator of the IANA function That could change
Standards Bodies “The nice thing about
standards is that there are so many to choose from.”
ISOC and IETF formally related
Standards bodies have various views of their own and each other’s roles, which do not agree
W3C
Necessity and importance of RIRs: RIPE, ARIN, APNIC IETF World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) ITU-T 3GPP/3GPP2 ETSI IEEE ICANN US Department of Commerce NTIA Internet Society (ISOC)
Necessity and importance of RIRs: RIPE, ARIN, APNIC
Current address structure: One or more address prefixes per ISP or
multihomed edge network Requires
Someone to assign the prefixes A venue for multiprovider policy
discussions
Necessity and importance of ICANN and registrars
TLD structure requires Someone to be a registrar Someone to maintain root zone
Is ICANN the only way to manage the root? ITU-T would like to do it DOC NTIA might think it could Alternate root operators suggest roots with random
content A certified organization could manage it
In short: Someone must manage root; need not be ICANN
Necessity and importance of US DoC NTIA
DoC thinks US started the Internet and Is responsible to make sure it runs
DoC says It would like to step out of parental role It currently doesn’t trust ICANN
I think we would agree that someone must ensure that root is preserved Much disagreement about DoC NTIA
Necessity and importance of standards bodies
There exist many bodies that develop standards used in the Internet. De facto standards:
IETF, W3C, IEEE De jure standards:
ETSI Tiphon, ITU-T, 3GPP, 3GPP2
De facto vs. De jure It has not been shown that one type of standard is
invariably better for technical standards
Expertise specific to the Internet
W3C develops/maintains HTML/XML IETF has displayed expertise in Internet
technology IETF developed elastic Internet model Internet Telephony uses IETF components (SIP,
RTP) ITU-T has developed some Internet
Telephony: H.323/H.248 Transposition of Telephone model to Internet
applications. Few other obvious claims to fame
Attempts to cooperate Standards bodies attempt to
cooperate: example, ICANN PSO PSO recently dissolved for cause
Cooperation is difficult for all organizations Political directions and rivalries Structural differences
Regulatory/Policy issues Example:
“Should Internet companies be responsible for interconnection to transit, or should they share the cost of a link?”
“How should Internet companies divide/gain references in the DNS Root?”
Community deeply divided Partially carried on in ICANN now:
Limited success ITU-T may be a logical place to have
such discussions Viewed with combination of interest and
suspicion by various parties
Place of Government(A very US mindset)
The purpose and goal of government Responsible to its people Economic and Military needs need to be
met by common technology Technology Policy
Funds research Creates environment for business
“I’m from the government and I’m here to help”
Can be a means of funding a critical enterprise Deployment of telephone technology in
20th century largely government initiative
Often a recipe for disaster X.25, ISO/OSI (GOSIP), French VideoTex
“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Lord Acton, in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton, 1887
The issue with government involvement with standards
ITU Direction: 1998 ITU directed to take leadership role in
Internet Standardization Zhao formed relationships with IETF Existing relationships with ETSI
Viewed by IETF as imperialist policy Concern about demonstrated expertise
Largely unsuccessful
ITU Plenipotentiary October 2002
The 1988 Treaty will be retained ITU actions related to the Internet can only
be Voluntary Recommendations up until a new World Conference. Would not take effect until 2009-2010 Not supported by US, and unlikely to be
ratified until 2011 or later European attempts to modify CS/CV
related to the Internet unsuccessful.
Network Security Resolution asking the ITU to
Strengthen the ITU standards work Increase the awareness of the importance of
network security The term “security” is not clearly specified; could
address integrity of the network, or integrity of communications, or other subjects
Impacts: Strengthen ITU-T and ITU-D work already
underway
ITU view of ICANN Modified Resolution 102 (Management of
Domain Names and IP Addresses) calls for the ITU to Take a “significant role” in the international
discussions on these topics, including internationalization of domain names
Represent Member State interests in these discussions
Work with other organization on programs to assist developing countries
ITU Website wording ITU Website for PP02 highlighted
Resolution 102 progress “ITU claims Internet names”
Changed yesterday, “Internet names: A matter for
government and private sector”
Conclusions Human motivations Organizational infrastructure Technology development Policy development
Human motivations in technology
We develop technology because a need exists
We deploy technology because it works
Not because we are told to
Much of the organizational infrastructure works
Regional Internet Registries Operational internet imperfect but
functional Technology Standardization
Works best when standardizing existing technology
Can be used to develop technology
There are serious policy issues
IETF is not a good forum for this ICANN problematic ITU would like to help
Internet Organizations:A study in political science
Fred Baker
Chair, ISOC
Cisco Fellow