[discuss] [IP] GOP, Dems Clash Over Online Domain Name Oversight/reality check

Sun Apr 13 23:55:34 UTC 2014

All,

I think that Joe has this exactly right.  The best path forward is to develop a truly credible solution that does what he stipulates below.

We cannot predict, or for the most part even influence, what the opposition in the US Congress will be able to do to slow or stop NTIA’s transition offer.  My sense is that it is the opposition is almost totally politically motivated and sees a weakness in the administration’s position that they might be able to exploit.  It’s consistent with much of the rest of their destructive, shameful and non-cooperative behavior throughout this administration.  But we cannot influence it much if at all, and we can only waste energy drilling down into it.

The same can be said for multi-stakeholderism.   Yes, there are definitional issues.  Yes, there are deep issues in political scent regarding theories of representation.  And yes, multistakeholder organizations do make mistakes from time to time.  But at the moment, ICANN is a specific instantiation of the multistakeholder model that has worked moderately well until now, and combined with the rest of the Internet ecosystem, forms our current reality.   NTIA has trust in ICANN; let’s use that to improve our situation.

While it is clearly pleasurable to believe that we have a clean slate on which to define our ideal world, most of life is not that way.  We are an a mid-game position;  there is history, and there are constraints.  Arguing about their fairness or appropriateness may provide some with emotional relief, but it does not get us to action that is desirable and possible.

Let’s take the advice below to heart, and exploit it to make possible a step forward in a direction upon which there is general agreement, rather than tilting at windmills.

George Sadowsky

On Apr 13, 2014, at 2:27 PM, joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com> wrote:

> Colleagues:
> 
> There is a challenge on the table to develop a solution that will credibly meet the NTIA conditions.  To date that is at best a work in progress.  You don't need to have Congressional action for a failure to meet those criteria to result in the status quo.  The best path forward on these matters is to develop a truly credible  solution that protects stability, functionality and unity while remaining a non-governmental, multistakeholder solution, not subject to capture or subversion by those elements that would try to make the Internet less open.  While I think we can all find ways to criticize what has been mutlistakeholder to date as not perfect, we should perhaps focus on those improvements that would lead to a  more credible, inclusive, participatory AND FUNCTIONAL solution that also recognizes and addresses the technical and operational needs of the Internet and governance.  Theoretical discussions of pure democracy while intellectually interesting, may not lead us to a practicable solution.
> 
> Best-
> 
> Joe
> On 4/13/2014 9:53 AM, michael gurstein wrote:
>> Accepting for the moment the argument that the USG has been completely benign and acting completely in support of the global public interest in its stewardship of the Internet,  shouldn’t someone somewhere be doing the deep thinking involved in figuring out what to do if/when the USG/Congress says to the world… “The Internet is ours, we paid for it, and you can’t have it or you can have it only on our terms… (or the diplomatic/technical equivalent)… and without of course, having any clear idea of what that does (or could) mean.
>> 
>> M
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne at warpspeed.com>
>> Date: Sunday, April 13, 2014
>> Subject: [Dewayne-Net] GOP, Dems Clash Over Online Domain Name Oversight
>> To: Multiple recipients of Dewayne-Net <dewayne-net at warpspeed.com>
>> 
>> 
>> GOP, DEMS CLASH OVER ONLINE DOMAIN NAME OVERSIGHT
>> By ALAN FRAM
>> Apr 10 2014
>> <http://bigstory.ap.org/article/gop-dems-clash-over-online-domain-name-oversight>
>> 
>> WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican opposition to Obama administration plans to spin off U.S. oversight of the Internet's domain name system is evolving into an election-year political fight, with GOP lawmakers using it as the latest front in their attacks on President Barack Obama's trustworthiness.
>> 
>> "We've seen enough out of this administration and its imperial presidency politics that I'm not going to just give them a blank pen and then walk away," Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., said Thursday as a House subcommittee he chairs voted to impose a one-year delay in implementing any changes so congressional investigators could study the issue.
>> 
>> The party-line 16-10 vote came as administration officials defended their proposal at other congressional hearings. And Democratic lawmakers said Republican warnings that the Internet could be turned over to hostile governments were the stuff of fantasy.
>> 
>> "It's not a conspiracy or a digital black helicopter," Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., said in a sarcastic reference to 1990s-era claims by some militias and other right-wing groups about government surveillance aircraft. "It's a plan, and I think it's time to move forward with it."
>> 
>> The back and forth comes during a campaign season in which Republicans have vilified Obama as exceeding his powers by taking steps such as delaying various deadlines set by his health care overhaul law, which they solidly oppose.
>> 
>> The latest dispute is over an administration announcement last month that it wants to give up its oversight of the non-profit U.S. corporation that manages the Internet's system of addresses, such as www.ap.org.
>> 
>> That entity — the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers — has allocated domain names and the numerical addresses to which they are attached since 1998. Ever since, ICANN's work has been overseen by the Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
>> 
>> "We are not giving up our leadership role," Lawrence Strickling, who heads the NTIA, told members of the House Judiciary Committee. "We are stepping out of clerical functions we currently perform."
>> 
>> Shedding oversight of how ICANN distributes addresses is a long-planned, logical next step, administration officials say. They say the move would still leave the U.S. with a voice on advisory committees and other entities that make decisions about larger questions about Internet policies.
>> 
>> The Obama administration and ICANN say decisions about who would take the current U.S. oversight role will be made by companies, engineers, nonprofit groups, governments and other Internet users — the same way many decisions about Internet policy are currently made.
>> 
>> "Everyone is at the table with equal voice," ICANN's president and CEO, Fadi Chehade, told the Judiciary panel. "The model works, and it works very well."
>> 
>> Critics say there is no way to know what new entity would take the administration's role, or what other changes might occur should the U.S. lose leverage with the domain assigning corporation The U.S. government has had a series of contracts with ICANN since 1998, with the current one expiring in September 2015 — with two two-year renewals possible.
>> 
>> [snip]
>> 
>> Dewayne-Net RSS Feed: <http://dewaynenet.wordpress.com/feed/>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Archives  | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140413/9db1c2d8/attachment-0001.html>