RE: [council] Rod on Internet governance

["Terry L Davis, P.E." <tdavis2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bill

I generally agree with Rod's views here but to add few things (many more
could be added) that the Council might want to be aware of that are likely
fall into the governance area issues besides "names and addresses".  (With
my techie beanie on :-) too:

- Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) is the foundational routing mechanism of the
Internet; it has scaled far beyond what was reasonable with the growth of
the Internet.  (It isn't really a protocol but a giant table containing all
the networks on the Internet and their links; worked fine in 1990.)  It
needs to be replaced to ensure long term Internet stability but the
technical solutions so far encroach on the "perceived anonomity of the
Internet"; so that remains at an impass for the moment. 
 
        This is also the fundamental reason that the RIR's continue to hold
the reigns on IPv6 address allocations so tightly too (an ITU issue..).

        And why there are restrictions being considered by the RIRs for some
types mobile routing services (we are trying to fix this via new mobile
routing protocols) to avoid global routing storms within BGP.

- DNS Take your pick here; WHOIS, take-overs, botnets, etc.  Some type of
really active governance and control measures are being called for from lots
of places to control cyber criminal activity.

- Having just sat through two days of high level cyber security meetings, it
seems likely that for at least some things that in the near future an
"Internet ID" is likely to be required (i.e. your banking). 

The economies and national infrastructures of probably 50 nations at least
are mostly or highly dependent on a functioning Internet; not mention
international finance and trade.  And cybercrime is now the top source of
income for "organized crime" around the globe.

Beyond "naming and addressing" today the Internet is mostly run by
"gentlemen's agreements".  Maybe that's good enough but it probably deserves
at least some discussion.

Take care
Terry 

PS: And I think it is safe to say that the Internet in 2015 will likely look
different than today.  The question is "how much"?


PPS: I'm fine with the other dinner topics but we all should be aware of the
other pressures on ICANN and the Internet.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of William Drake
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:57 AM
To: GNSO Council List
Subject: [council] Rod on Internet governance


Hi,

This is relevant to the thread about whether to discuss ICANN's strategic
response to global Internet governance debates at the Council-Board dinner.
In light of all that that has gone on over the past few years and the
continuing discontent of a majority of governments with ICANN's
constitutional structure, is it enough to simply argue that any departure
from the status quo would make ICANN less "nimble"?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/icann-head-warns-against-putt
ing-internet-addresses-under-un-control/article1579820/