[governance] [IGP-ANNOUNCE] IGP Newsletter, Vol 2.02

Mon Apr 30 11:37:24 EDT 2007

FYI.

======================================
Internet Governance Project Newsletter
======================================
...current events in Internet Governance and the activities of the Internet
Governance Project.
http://www.internetgovernance.org

Volume 2.02
April 27, 2007

========
Contents
========

[1] ICANN's Deregulation Leads to (Surprise!) TLD Price Increases
[2] DNSSEC: A Serial Blog
[3] Master Key to the Internet? US Homeland Security Takes some Heat
[4] Court Tells USG to Reveal More about its role in .xxx
[5] Will Whois Debate Ever End?
[6] Civil Society Experts Convene for Global Governance Workshop
[7] IGP Research: Award Winning Papers
[8] Upcoming Event: Symposium on Internet Governance and Security
[9] Upcoming Event: IGF Consultation

=================================================================
[1] No Price Caps + No Registry Competition = TLD Price Increases
=================================================================

Of course the press was loudest this month when VeriSign, in line with its
recently minted registry contract with ICANN, hiked its prices for .COM to
$6.42 per year per domain.  But shortly thereafter the comparably smaller
registries for .INFO and .ORG followed suit, raising their prices to
$6.15.  To be honest, none of the changes should have been a surprise.

A feature of ICANN's new registry agreements minted in 2006 was the lifting
of provisions imposing price controls on the .COM, .BIZ, .INFO, and .ORG
registry operators. Concern about the lifting of these controls and the
potential for discriminatory or variable pricing was the focus of the
majority of thousands of messages submitted in response to the request for
public comments.

All ccTLDs and many gTLDs (e.g. .AERO, .CAT, .COOP, .JOBS, .MOBI, .MUSEUM,
.TEL, and .TRAVEL) operate without any ICANN-mandated price controls.

=============================
[2] IGP Examines DNS Security
=============================

During April, the IGP Blog has examined DNS Security Extensions, focusing
specifically on the problem of cryptographically signing the DNS root zone
to improve internet security. We've highlighted some of the hidden and
not-so-hidden political implications of this technical change. And in the
coming posts, we'll show how DNSSEC implementation, if handled properly,
creates an opportunity to overcome some of the thorny global governance
issues associated with the current root zone file management procedure.
These postings -- hopefully with the aid of your comments -- will evolve
into a new position paper on the politics and economics of DNSSEC to be
released in May.

Securing the Root: Introduction
<http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2007/4/2/2852013.html>

Securing the Root: What is DNSSEC? What's the controversy?
<http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2007/4/9/2866546.html>

Securing the Root: The root of the problem, creating trust anchor(s)
<http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2007/4/18/2890435.html>

================================================
[3] US Homeland Security Dept. Attracts Interest
================================================

While the web was abuzz over a story how DHS 'wants the master key' to a
secure DNS, IGP was busy reporting the actual detail of the controversy.
Signing the root is considered a critical step to deploying DNSSEC widely
across the Internet. DHS's draft proposal, "Signing the Domain Name System
Root Zone: Technical Specification," was quietly released last fall to a
limited group of experts for review. It focused almost exclusively on a
single 'Root Key Operator,' suggesting a governmental organization or
contractor could assume the role. Citing the need to avoid "explicit
interdependencies," a split key management approach which distributes
authority among multiple parties and is a standard in high security federal
systems was discounted. The DHS-funded study did, however, recognize other
options, including multiple RKOs, in a small appendix.

<http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2007/4/15/2881860.html>

==================================================================
[4] Court Orders USG to Tell More About its Role in .xxx Rejection
==================================================================

ICANN finally made a decision to kill the ICM Registry's .xxx application,
with the Board voting 9-5 against it in Lisbon last month. In a bad sign for
the future, the vote indicated that ICANN's approach to top level domains
will be to block any proposed that are politically or culturally
controversial. The controversy over domain names and free expression on the
Internet ignited robust discussion on civil society Internet governance
lists <http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/arc/governance/2007-04/msg00008.html>.

In response to ICANN's decision, ICM registry released details of a court
decision which ruled that the Departments of Commerce and State failed to
justify withholding documents that reflect the U.S. government's role in
meddling with ICANN's consideration of .xxx.  The Court observed that
"apparently in response to pressure from the U.S. government and other
concerned parties - the [ICANN] Board postponed its vote on the measure at
eight subsequent board meetings."

It further ordered the government to turn over the documents or fully
explain its failure to do so as part of official agency deliberations about
the role of the U.S. government in ICANN's approval of .xxx. It discounted
the government's excuses for withholding or redacting key documents, and
admonished the departments that  "[d]escriptions of mere opinions relating
to ICANN's consideration of .XXX - absent, for example, corresponding
assertions that such opinions concern DOC's role in ICANN process and
contribute to an ongoing dialogue or debate regarding that role - do not
enjoy deliberative process privilege."

ICM Registry welcomed the Court's ruling.  Stuart Lawley, CEO of ICM
Registry said: "Recent events remind us that intergovernmental email
exchanges can be more illuminating of agency actions than official
explanations."

View the Court order here:
<http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2007/3/30/2847139.html>

===============================
[5] Will Whois Debate Cycle On?
===============================

Despite the Whois Task Force issuing its conclusive final report in March,
any final policy change by ICANN remains undone.  The final report's
recommendations to protect domain name registrants from unrestricted
harvesting and mining of their contact data were a hard fought victory for
public interest advocates, who built a tenuous alliance with the domain name
registration industry to the dismay of the US government, and copyright and
law enforcement interests.

The GNSO Council will now begin consideration of the Task Force
recommendations in order to create a Whois policy. Discussions were
initiated during the ICANN Lisbon meetings, and will continue online and
through conference calls. According to the ICANN website, the GNSO Council
may make a policy recommendation to the ICANN Board following it's
deliberations. Should the ICANN Board receive a recommendation from the GNSO
Council, it must then consider whether to accept it.

It is feared that the group will simply pound away for 4 more months on the
same polarized disagreements that occupied the prior Whois Task Force for
three years. One participant in an international organization described the
result this way: "I found this process kind of bizarre, with a group sent
out to work on the issue and coming back with a report and two conclusions,
another group coming up with a set of draft policy principles which
apparently are not based on the previous work done by the first group, to
conclude with a decision of the originating group to set up another working
group which has the objective to come up with...(ad libitum?)"

You can follow the issue here:
<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/>

==========================================
[6] Civil Society and Global Public Policy
==========================================

IGP's Milton Mueller attended the international meeting on "Civil Society
Intervention in the Reform of Global Public Policy" in Paris April 17-19.
The purpose of the meeting was to allow civil society organizations and
academics from various continents, languages and issue-areas "to compare and
analyze their strategies, methods and tools." The space for this discussion
was provided by the Ford Foundation and the Institute for a new Reflection
on Governance.

The seminar used three global governance campaigns as the basis for
discussions: 1) reform campaigns around International Financial Institutions
(IFI); 2) promotion of the Tobin Tax, and 3) Internet governance. Conference
organizer Lisa Jordan of the Ford Foundation explained that one reason for
the choices was that the IFI campaigns are mature, dating back 25-30 years;
the Tobin tax campaigns are middle-aged, and the Internet governance arena
is a very young one.

The Internet governance advocates and researchers in attendance included not
only Mueller but Willie Currie of APC, Sean O'Siochru of the CRIS Campaign,
Veronique Kleck of VECAM in France, and Dipankar Sinha of the University of
Calcutta. As the newest and least familiar of the global governance
campaigns, Internet governance as an issue benefited greatly from the
exposure, attracting intense interest from the participants in other
issue-networks.

There is no room here for a full discussion of all the comparative lessons
learned, but one message in particular about global Internet governance
emerged. There was a great deal of discussion of how we assess the value of
institutional venues to target, with the Internet Governance Forum in
particular and multistakeholder venues in general (e.g., the World
Commission on Dams) receiving much scrutiny. But there was a consensus that
these global institutions create civil society; i.e., they are spotlights
that allow many different CS actors to find each other. WSIS succeeded in
mobilizing civil society groups around communication-information policy
issues and brought together people and issue networks that had not worked
together before. The IGF is the only venue that can maintain that role now.
The problem, of course, is that if IGF does not seriously affect policy or
engage decision makers then its ability to attract and mobilize CS (and
other players) will atrophy.

Another interesting message to emerge was one of patience. International
processes are slow and may conflict with the expectations created by the
rapid technological and industry change in the IG area. An activist noted
that time spans of 15-20 years were required.

==========================================================
[7] IGP Researchers Win Awards, Shape Scientific Discourse
==========================================================

IGP's ability to link Internet governance advocacy with rigorous scholarly
work was visibly apparent over the past few months.

Doctoral candidates Brenden Kuerbis and Christiane Page will present a paper
at the 2007 International Communications Association meeting in San
Francisco next month. Their recently published work , co-authored with
Milton Mueller, was given the ICA law and policy division's "top three
paper" award. The research examines communications rights and the emergence
of transnational civil society advocacy in Internet governance during the
World Summit on the Information Society. <
http://ijoc.org/ojs/index.php/ijoc/article/view/13>

The evolution of Internet governance was also the topic of a recent article
by IGP Partners Milton L. Mueller, John Mathiason and Hans Klein.  Their
article, "The Internet and Global Governance: Principles and Norms for a New
Regime," was published in the April/June issue of Global Governance. <
http://www.atypon-link.com/LRP/doi/abs/10.5555/ggov.2007.13.2.237>

Emerald Group Publishing informed us that Milton Mueller's recently
published paper, "IP addressing: the next frontier of internet governance
debate" has been selected as a Highly Commended Winner at the Emerald
Literati Network Awards for Excellence 2007. <
www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14636690610688051>  Partner John Mathiason
also published work earlier this year with Kumarian Press.  "Invisible
Governance: International Secretariats in Global Politics" examines the
hidden role of these influential bodies in global public policy. <
http://www.kpbooks.com/details.asp?title=Invisible+Governance>

Finally, IGP Partner Derrick Cogburn was elected Co-Program Chair and
Vice-President Elect for the International Communication Section (ICOMM) of
the International Studies Association. In this role, he along with his
colleagues will be responsible for planning the vast majority of ISA's
program over the next three years.  Internet governance research is growing
by leaps and bounds and IGP researchers are leading the way, congratulations
to all!

=================================================================
[8] Upcoming Event: Symposium on Internet Governance and Security
=================================================================

Internet Governance and Security: Exploring the Relationship between Global
and National Solutions
May 17, 2007
2:00-6:00 PM
Swiss Embassy, 2900 Cathedral Ave. N.W. (Metro: Red Line, Woodley)
Washington DC, USA
<http://internetgovernance.org/events.html#Symposium_051707>

This symposium on Internet Governance and Internet security will explore the
relationships between global and national Solutions to problems of cyber
crime and cyber security. The meeting will focus on the tensions and
complementarities between global and national policy making for issues
related to the security and privacy of commerce and communication on the
Internet.

The symposium will be held in Washington, DC, May 17, 2007, beginning at
2:00 pm and running until 6:00 pm. The event will be held in the facilities
of the Swiss Embassy. At 6:30, the Swiss Embassy will house a reception for
sponsors, organizers, speakers, and invited guests.

Three academic institutions are cooperating to define the program: Syracuse
University School of Information Studies; the George Mason University Law
School's Critical Infrastructure Protection Program; The Swiss Federal
Institute of Technology at Lausanne. The meeting coincides with the US
module of the EPFL's global Executive Master's in e-governance, which will
bring 20 students and participants in the program to Washington.

Most cyber security initiatives are undertaken at the national level. But
the Internet is a global infrastructure and effective policy often requires
a globally coordinated effort. New global institutions such as ICANN and the
Internet Governance Forum have been created to meet the need for global
coordination and policy development. Older international institutions, such
as the ITU and the United Nations, also wish to play a role. And powerful
national governments such as the United States and China can often exert
international influence over Internet policy. Many times these different
sources of authority work at cross purposes or compete for influence. Often
there are disagreements or uncertainties about what is the proper role of
nations, international organizations, the private sector and the technical
community.

This symposium will explore these issues, attracting an elite audience of
technical experts, policy academics, U.S. and international policy makers in
government, and industry players. They will identify and discuss Internet
governance issues such as the security of the domain name system (DNSSEC),
spam and cybercrime, identity and identification, and private sector
security regimes in sectors such as banking.

If you would like to attend, please RSVP to Kathryn Allen, at
kallen02 at syr.edu

**Agenda**

2:00 Welcome
Milton Mueller, Syracuse University iSchool, Internet Governance Project,
Host
Matthias Finger, Swiss Federal Polytechnical Institute (EPFL)
John McCarthy, Critical Infrastructure Protection Program, GMU Law School

2:10*3:30 Panel 1 - Securing the Root: The Politics and Economics of DNSSEC
Moderator: Brenden Kuerbis, Syracuse University
Paul Vixie, ISC
Becky Burr, Wilmer Hale, Washington DC
Scott Rose, NIST
David Conrad, ICANN/IANA
Thierry Moreau, Connotech, Canada
Matt Larsen, VeriSign

3:45*4:45 Panel 2 - Taking Charge: Public Sector Plans and Private Sector
Priorities
John A. McCarthy, George Mason University School of Law
Jim Kadtke,
John Sabo, IT-ISAC
Marcus Sachs, SRI International

5:00*6:00 Panel 3 - National Interest, Global Governance: Which Suits the
Internet?
David Johnson, New York Law School
Milton Mueller, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
Marc Rotenberg, EPIC
Margie Milam, MarkMonitor

6:30 Reception
Sponsors: Wilmer Hale and Syracuse University
(Invitation only)

=============================
[9] Upcoming Event: IGF Consultation
=============================

A new round of consultations will take place on the 23 May 2007, in
preparation for the upcoming Internet Governance Forum in Rio.  The meeting
will be held at the ITU Tower, Room C. It will be part of a cluster of WSIS
related events which will take place in Geneva from 15-25 May, 2007. All
stakeholders interested in attending are invited to register online now <
http://www.itu.int/cgi-bin/htsh/edrs/ITU-SG/edrs15/edrs.registration.form>.
The purpose of these consultations is to address the agenda and the
programme of the Rio de Janeiro meeting.

Stakeholders are invited to send in contributions, as an input into these
consultations to: igf at unog.ch or post their comments in our online
discussion section <http://intgovforum.org/forum/index.php?board=13.0>.
Contributions and discussion posts received by 14 May, 2007 will be
reflected in a synthesis paper summarizing the input received. The paper
will be made available on the IGF website <http://intgovforum.org> prior to
the consultations.

=========================
Subscription Information
=========================

Subscribe/unsubscribe from the IGP-Announce mailing list via web interface:
http://internetgovernance.org/subscribe.html

===============
Privacy Policy
===============

The IGP-Announce mailing list is used only to mail IGP news announcements.
We do not sell, rent or share our mailing list.  We do not enhance (link to
other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name.

In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail address from
this list, please follow the above instructions under "subscription
information."

Internet Governance Project
http://internetgovernance.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070430/9dd91532/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: message-footer.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070430/9dd91532/attachment.txt>