| Who we are | Organizations | Get Involved! | Helpdesk |
| Weblog | About FLORA | Server project | F.A.Q. |
|
|
|||||||
| ||||||||
Election 2006 (and beyond): Digital Copyright Canada
From: mcr_-at-_sandelman.ottawa.on.ca (Michael C. Richardson)
Date: 17 Oct 1998 10:08:48 -0400
IANA/Dept. of Commerce appear to have been subpeonaed to the US Congress!
------- Forwarded Message
From admin@autono.net Fri Oct 16 19:51:42 1998
Return-Path: <admin@autono.net>
Received: from mediafilter.org (MEDIAFILTER.ORG [209.48.2.20])
by lox.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca (8.8.7/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA21727
for <mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:51:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mediafilter.org (209.48.2.20) by mediafilter.org with
SMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 1.1.2); Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:51:18 -0400
Received: from mail.uswebhosting.com (209.143.225.25) by
mediafilter.org with SMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 1.1.2);
Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:42:16 -0400
Received: from [168.143.17.196] by mail.uswebhosting.com
(Netscape Mail Server v2.01) with SMTP id AAA29303;
Sender: dns.forum@lists.xs2.net
Errors-To: admin@autono.net
Reply-To: dns.forum@lists.xs2.net
Message-Id: <1303555560-344567@mediafilter.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Precedence: Bulk
X-Listserver: Macjordomo 1.1 - Macintosh Listserver
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:39:10 -0000
From: Glenn Manishin <glenn@technologylaw.com>
To: "Multiple recipients of dns.forum" <dns.forum@lists.xs2.net>
Subject: [DNS.Forum] Bliley (House Commerce) Investigation Letter
X-Filtered-By: NoCeM-E v0.6 (http://www.novia.net/~doumakes)
Following is an OCR version of the letter from Chairman Tom Bliley (R-VA)
letter to Secretary Daley at the Commerce Department regarding DNS and
the ICANN formation process. A substantially similar letter was also
sent to Ira Magaziner at the White House.
Glenn
- ---------------------------------
October 15, 1998
The Honorable William M. Daley
Secretary of Commerce
U.S. Department of Commerce
14th Street at Constitution Avenue. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20230
Dear Mr. Secretary:
I am writing to express my concerns about the role of the Department of
Commerce in the transfer of the Internet's Domain Name System (DNS) from
the public sector to the private sector.
On June I0, 1998, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade and
Consumer Protection held a hearing on the future of the Domain Name
System. Associate Administrator of the National Telecommunication and
Information Administration (NTIA) for International Affairs, J. Beckwith
Burr, testified on the Administration's recently released policy
statement on the future management of the DNS. This policy statement,
known as the White Paper, outlines the Administration's proposal to turn
over responsibility of the management of the DNS from the government to a
newly created non-profit corporation. This new private corporation is
intended to provide for competition in domain registration and global
participation by all interested parties in the future management of the
DNS.
I welcomed the White Paper's proposal for the new corporation to be
"governed on the basis of a sound and transparent decision-making
process, which protects against capture by a self-interested faction."
The While Paper reiterated the need for openness when it stated that "The
new corporation's processes should be fair, open and pro-competitive,
protecting against capture by a narrow group of stakeholders."
At the hearing, I underscored the importance of private sector leadership
and the need for stability and continuity in the operation of the
Internet during the transfer of DNS management lo the private sector. I
believed that an open, consensus-based process to develop the new
self-governing structure, embodied in the White Paper, was a promising
approach. At the meetings over the summer of the International Forum for
the White Paper (IFWP), a broad-based consensus was reached among the
participants which echoed tile principles of the White Paper.
To further the goals of the White Paper, it would seem incumbent upon the
Administration to encourage all key Internet stakeholders to participate
in an open, consensus-driven governance process, and, n particular, to
encourage meaningful participation of one important stakeholder, the
Internet Assigned Numbers Authority IANA). As you know, IANA, a
Department of Defense contractor, establishes technical protocols and
allocates Internet Protocols (IP) addresses to regional IP numbering
authorities, two functions that are critical to the operation of the
Internet. I was disappointed to learn that IANA apparently did not
meaningfully participate in the lFWP process.
Instead of participating in that process, IANA, under the leadership of
Dr. Jon Postel, apparently developed its own DNS reform proposal behind
closed doors with little consultation from the broader Internet
community. The final IANA proposal, which was delivered to the Department
of Commerce on October 2, only represented the position of IANA and no
other parties.
Concurrent with IANA's release of its proposal for the new DNS
corporation, known as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
Numbers (ICANN), IANA named nine individuals to serve as interim members
of the board of directors of ICANN. I am concerned about the lack of
openness in the consideration and selection process for ICANN's interim
board members. In fact, Dr. Postel's written testimony recently before a
House Committee acknowledged that the selection process for members of
the interim board of directors of the new corporation to administer the
DNS, was "undemocratic and closed." Further, I am concerned that the lack
of a solid American majority on the interim board fails to reflect the
leading tole of American business investment and consumer-use in the
growth of the Internet.
The Commerce Department has provided a comment period of just six
business days (which began with the receipt of the proposals late on
October 2, and ended on October 13, 1998), for the public to respond to
the four proposals submitted to NTIA pursuant to the White Paper's
request for proposals to establish a private sector entity I am concerned
that this limited lime period is inadequate for all interested parties to
provide meaningful comment on these proposals that are crucial to the
future of the Internet and electronic commerce.
Finally, I have concerns regarding the legal authority upon which the
Department has undertaken the process to transfer DNS management from the
National Science Foundation (NSF) to a newly created non-profit
corporation. As you know, the NSF took the lead in commercialization of
the Internet through its operation of the NSFNET and its 1993 cooperative
agreement with Network Solutions Incorporated (NSI) to register domain
names and manage the root server system. It is my understanding that the
NSF/NSI cooperative agreement was transferred to the Department of
Commerce in September l998.
I am concerned about the manner in which the process of privatizing the
governance of the DNS has apparently unraveled. I was hopeful that the
Administration would bring leadership to this important effort. We are at
a critical juncture in the efforts to establish a workable governance
structure that will guide the future of the Internet and electronic
Commerce. The success or failure of this current undertaking will have a
profound impact on the growth of electronic commerce as well as future
Internet governance debates. It is vitally important that this first
attempt at self-governance be undertaken in a deliberate, open and fair
manner, so that it is not subject to capture by "a narrow group of
stakeholders. " A loss of credibility in the Internet community at large
will seriously undermine the ability of the new corporation to administer
the Domain Name System and the stability of the Internet itself.
Pursuant to Rules X and Xl of the U.S. House of Representatives, I
request that you provide the following information to the Committee by
November 5, 1998
1. Please provide the Committee with an explanation, including citations
to relevant statutes, of the Administration's authority over management
of the Internet. In particular please explain: (1) the Department of
Commerce's authority to assume Me NSF cooperative agreement with NSI; and
(2) the Department of Commerce's authority to transfer responsibility for
the management of the DNS to the private sector.
2. Given IANA's historical role in the operation of the Internet and its
role in establishing a new management structure, please describe doe
Department of Commences efforts to encourage IANA's meaningful
participation in the IFWP process. Additionally! please describe the
Department's knowledge and/or involvement in IANA's decision to submit
its own proposal. Please provide all records relating to IANA's
participation in the IFWP or lANA's decision to submit a separate
proposal.
3. Why is the Department of Commerce's comment period so short? Why did
the Department provide just six full business days for the public to
analyze the proposals and provide comment? Please explain the
Department's regulations and guidance governing public comment periods
generally and in relation to the consideration of the four DNS reform
proposals together with the relevant regulations and guidance.
4. Did the Department of Commerce have any involvement in the
consideration or selection of ICANN's proposed interim board members? If
so, please describe the Department's involvement and list and describe
any communications the Department had with the following people or
entities regarding the consideration or selection of the proposed inuring
hoard members prior to the announcement of the proposed interim board
members: (1) IANA or its representatives; (2) the proposed interim board
members; (3) representatives of foreign governments, international
organizations, or non-governmental organizations; or (4) other
individuals and organizations outside the US government. Please provide
all records relating to such communications (whether written, electronic
or oral).
For purposes of responding to this request, the term "records,"
"relating," "relate," and "regarding" should be interpreted in accordance
with the Attachment to this letter.
Should you have any questions regarding this request, please contact me
or have your staff contact Mark Paoletta, Chief Counsel for Oversight and
Investigations, or Paul Scolese, Professional staff Member, at (202)
22S-2927.
The House Commerce Committee intends to monitor the consideration of the
draft proposals and the transfer of DNS management to the private sector
very closely for the remainder of the 105th Congress and throughout the
106^ Congress. As the Administration undertakes this effort, I ask that
the Committee be kept informed of and consulted on the process in a
timely fashion.
Sincerely,
/s/
Tom Bliley
Chairman
Attachment
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
Glenn B. Manishin
Blumenfeld & Cohen-Technology Law Group
1615 M Street, N.W. Suite 700
Washington, DC 20036
202.955.6300 X229 Tel/vms
202.955.6460 Fax
glenn@technologylaw.com
http://www.technologylaw.com/
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
........................................................................
.
...
.....
.......
DNS.FORUM is intended to inform the public on the current process
of privatizing the administration and management of the Internet's
DNS (Domain Name System) and to provide an environment to foster an
equitable review and oversight of that process.
Read the DNS.Forum archive on the web at
http://dnsforum.tao.ca
........................................................................
------- End of Forwarded Message
| Please read the FLORA.org Terms and Conditions before you submit information to FLORA.org | |
Join the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign(USA) (Canada) |
 FLORA Community Web
(FLORA.ORG) is sponsored by FLORA
Community Consulting (FLORA.CA).
|