ICANN2.0 — A Short Cut to the Reestablishment of National Sovereignty in the Cyberspace

1. ICANN2.0 — A Short Cut to the Reestablishment of National Sovereignty in the Cyberspace Jia-Lu Cheng Goldsmiths College,UOL Luke@gate.sinica.edu.tw 2003/07/21

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

3. What is the Internet? According to U.S. Federal Networking Council (FNC), "Internet" refers to the global information system that -- (i) is logically linked together by a globally unique address space 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 aggregations of similar organizations and "free of undesirable semantics."

6. The Growth of Number and Percentage of Internet Host

7. The Growth rate of Internet Host

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. ccTLDs Furthermore, 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 Country Names and other UN sources.

12. ccTLDs Number of ccTLDs Created Per Year

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 Management 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. November 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

16. ICANN • Relationship between ccTLDs, ICANN, and Local 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 Presented by Governmental Advisory Committee (23 February 2000) ■Best Practices Guidelines for ccTLD Managers (24 February 2000) ■Update on ccTLD Agreements (9 September 2001)

17. ICANN Michael M. Roberts, former President and Chief Executive Officer 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 on 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 Users, 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 Reform (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

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