Berlin, 09.12.2014 – Since the US Government announced in March their intention to withdraw from their role as supervisor of ICANN, and as such also of the IANA functions, there has been a world-wide discussion on who should take over the IANA Stewardship, and how the supervision of ICANN should be shaped in the future. ICANN and eco offered, in the second eco Dialog on the Future, a platform for analyzing the current status and discussing possible Solutions.
Protocols, Names & Numbers
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, ICANN, is responsible for three of the central functions of the Internet: The administration and allocation of protocols like IPv4 and IPv6, the web addresses – what is known as the Top-Level Domains – and the IP addresses.
Directly after the welcome by eco Board members Prof. Michael Rotert and Oliver Süme and the ICANN Vice-President Europe Jean-Jaques Sahel, the discussion began. This was led by Thomas Rickert, himself eco Director of Names & Numbers, Member of the GNSO Council and Co-Chair of the Enhancing ICANN Accountability Cross-Community Working Group.
The representatives of the technical community Axel Pawlik (Managing Director, RIPE NCC) and Hans-Peter Dittler (Board Member, ISOC Deutschland) made clear at the very beginning of the Dialog on the Future that the supervision of the protocols and IP addresses is far less politically explosive than the allocation of web addresses. Ultimately, the processes currently applied are seen to be satisfactory, and no need is seen for drastic changes.
ICANN, IANA & NTIA
The three functions mentioned above are the responsibility of ICANN’s Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). This is currently under the supervision of the US Department of Commerce. This means that when ICANN delegates new Top Level Domains, the decision process currently goes through the NTIA, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, as the responsible authority. Thomas Rickert commented, however, that „The US Government has so far behaved very responsibly with this position of power and has performed this function with an exclusively notarial function to the greatest possible extent.“ Despite this, there have been growing calls for a comprehensive reform of ICANN in conjunction with the Stewardship Transition.
ICANN Accountability – Multi-Stakeholder out of control?
ICANN should – according to the requirements of the US government – become an international committee based on the Multi-Stakeholder Model, in order to bring together the variety of interests. „In addition,“ explained Wolf-Ulrich Knoben, „the supervision may not be transferred to another government.“ But how can such an institution be developed, with mechanisms and regulations for checks and balances? Who will be accountable for ICANN when the US supervision ceases? Even though the opinions diverge, Wolfgang Kleinwächter, Member of the ICANN Board, summed up the problem succinctly: „ICANN should not develop an uncontrolled life of its own, like FIFA or the International Olympic Committee.“
Ultimately, a lot of interests collide in the allocation of Top-Level Domains, as was demonstrated recently in the discussion on the extension .vin or .wine. As further representatives of Germany on the 20-strong ICANN Board along with Kleinwächter, Erika Mann discussed the questions of the transition and accountability with Hubert Schöttner from the German Ministry for Economics, who sits in the ICANN in the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), and Dr. Jörg Schweiger, from DENIC eG (.de), as the Technical Operator of one of the Top-Level Domains.
2015 – The year of the Stewardship Transition
The NTIA has called upon the ICANN community to develop a proposal for the design of the Stewardship Transition by summer 2015. The Cross Community Working Group, mentioned above, presented a first draftfor this in December, which can be publically commented on until 22 December.
This proposal suggests establishing a further organization which can then supervise ICANN. „This could be a short-term solution. However, sooner or later this committee would also need to be supervised“, commented Kleinwächter. „The effort involved is not justified, given straight-forward competencies“, he continued. In place of the NTIA supervision, „some kind of Sword of Damocles“ should be installed, so that those actively involved can actually be held accountable for their decisions.
Additionally, questions of the legal structure, the form and the location and the associated area jurisdiction for such an organization arose, questions which cannot be quickly resolved – if at all.
Therefore, there is considerable need for clarification about what the ICANN community needs to develop and define in what is known as „Workstream 1“, so that the proposal for the transition can be submitted to the NTIA in summer 2015. For „Workstream 2“ – the tasks which should be undertaken after the transition –comprehensive requirements for stricter compliance regulations, internal audits and financing and budget will be on the agenda.
In conclusion, against the backdrop of the many positions and opinions, Rickert asked the participants: „Can we manage the transition in September 2015?“ Here, there was broad consensus that the opportunity should not be wasted.
The eco Names & Numbers Forum will continue the Dialog on the Future in 2015 together with the Internet Governance department, in the eco Capital Office in Berlin, providing information on the further developments.
Further information
- Additional pictures: Take a look to the Flickr-Album
- eco Dialogue on the Future II: The agenda
- eco Dialogue on the Future II: Report on golem.de
- eco Dialogue on the Future I: The Report
