[governance] Fwd: [IGP Announce] Internet Governance Project Headlines

[Brenden Kuerbis]

FYI, apologies in advance for crossposting.

Best,

Brenden Kuerbis
Internet Governance Project
http://internetgovernance.org



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Internet Governance Project <info at internetgovernance.org>
Date: Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 4:27 PM
Subject: [IGP Announce] Internet Governance Project Headlines
To: bkuerbis <bkuerbis at twcny.rr.com>




January 12, 2009

Top Internet Governance Issues to Watch in 2009
IGF Workshop Report: "The Future of ICANN: After the JPA, What?"
Europe pioneers IPv4 address transfer markets
One Good Outcome from the Wall Street Journal - Google Flap
Search IGP Blog
________________________________

Top Internet Governance Issues to Watch in 2009

Here it is: IGP's contribution to the beginning of the year
forecasting. Note well: these are not predictions of outcomes but
designations of critical areas of change and decision in Internet
governance, where the outcome is still unknown. We are sure we've
overlooked some critical arenas -- use our comments to tell us what
they are!

1. ICANN and its relationship to the USG
A shift from Republican Party conservative nationalism to Democratic
Party liberal internationalism, along with the expiration of the Joint
Project Agreement between ICANN and the U.S. Commerce Department on
September 30, makes 2009 a watershed year for ICANN's tether to the
U.S. government. Moves toward internationalization by the Obama
administration could break policy logjams that date back to 2003 (if
not earlier); on the other hand, reassertion of the status quo would
put an end to the original Clinton Administration plans for a
"transition" once and for all. As Harold Feld put it in a notable blog
post, the USG has to "quit playing games" and fish or cut bait on the
"transition" to nongovernmental adminstration of DNS. A lot of subtle
repercussions will be felt either way; for example, international
acceptance of a method for signing the root so that secure DNS can be
widely implemented could depend on how the ICANN-USG relationship is
reformed. It is also likely that there will be agency turf battles
over ICANN policy within the US government.

2. Deep Packet Inspection in the service of Internet control
Concerns about copyright protection, terrorism, illegal content,
efficient bandwidth management, intrusion detection, botnets and
viruses are all converging to tempt various parties to experiment with
Deep Packet Inspection (DPI). DPI is the technology that automatically
opens all your packets in real time and looks inside them before it
decides whether to forward them or not. Will 2009 be the year that DPI
starts to settle into place as an integrated infrastructure of
Internet control – the ultimate man-in-the-middle solution to Internet
governance problems? Or, conversely, will it be the year that we learn
it doesn't really work as well as we think it does; that it can't
handle the capacity of higher speed networks; that principled ISPs and
digital rights groups take DPI off the agenda by highlighting its
hostile relationship to privacy and network neutrality? The Comcast
incident and the Belgian court case were only the opening shots in
this battle. DPI vendors take note: this is the year we will find out
which of these scenarios is true (or, if we land somewhere in the
middle, we should get a good glimpse of which end of the spectrum we
end up on).

3. The new Internet Protocol: Can the Net reproduce itself?
Forget all that talk about a "clean slate Internet;" we're having
enough trouble implementing a new IP standard that developed a decade
ago. 2009 will mark a turning point in the most important technical
standards migration on the Internet since its opening to the public in
1991 – the transition from IP version 4 to IP version 6. IPv4 is the
original Internet protocol but it is running out of address space. IP
version 6 is a new standard with a much bigger address space, but it's
incompatible with the older standard and has no major advantages over
IPv4 other than its more capacious address space. For many years
incompatibility, the lack of a reliable gateway protocol making v4 and
v6 compatible, and the additional expense, risk and trouble of
shifting to a new standard have created a "you first" game in which
ISPs wait for someone else to take the lead. If that pattern breaks
this year we could see a stampede toward IPv6. But if the holding
pattern doesn't break, then the regional address registries will be
forced to make major changes in their policies to head off IPv4
address shortages in 2010 and 2011: legalized address transfer
markets, tougher reclamation policies, pressure on pre-RIR legacy
holders, higher fees, reservation policies, and so on.

4. ICANN's abysmal new gTLD process
On December 18, the U.S. government gave ICANN a Christmas present: a
letter containing a thorough trashing of its plan to open the DNS root
to lots of new top level domains. The U.S. letter joined a chorus of
big business and trademark interests who have always been against any
new TLDs, but it also made some valid criticisms about the proposal's
incredible attempt to set up ICANN as global arbiter of "morality and
public order," suggesting that that function might be better left to
local laws. Will the U.S. move succeed in intimidating the ICANN
Board? It already seems to have produced a 4 month delay. Bad as the
policy is, derailing it opens up a huge can of worms. While no one
will rush to passionately defend a policy that institutes global
censorship of TLD strings, imposes outrageously high entry costs, and
gives any organized group in the world a hecklers veto, the fact
remains that this Rube Goldberg contraption emerged (more or less
legitimately) from ICANN's policy process. The policy took full
account of the "Principles regarding new TLDs" given to ICANN by its
Governmental Advisory Committee (which includes the US) and bent over
backwards to accommodate the concerns of the trademark owners who are
now complaining about it. And what about the long-delayed
internationalized domain names? If ICANN can't close the deal on this
one, people would have to start asking whether ICANN can succeed in
making public policy about anything related to DNS or internet
identifiers; one would have to conclude that there is something
fundamentally unworkable about ICANN.

5. IGF renewal
By the end of this year it should be clear whether the Internet
Governance Forum was a short, not too unpleasant footnote in the
history of Internet governance or a relatively permanent feature of it
going forward. The World Summit on the Information Society's Tunis
Agenda gave the IGF a five-year initial life span; by the end of 2010,
the UN Secretary-General must "examine the desirability of the
continuation of the Forum, in formal consultation with Forum
participants," and "make recommendations to the UN Membership in this
regard." This means that consultations on the future of IGF will take
place in the second half of 2009, and that the issue of continuation
will probably form a major part of the discussions at the Cairo IGF in
November 2009. By the end of this year if should be clear whether
anyone out to kill the IGF or not. We suspect that the IGF will be
renewed; the more important issue, of course, is whether the IGF
evolves into a more influential and meaningful forum. We have
published some analysis of that question.

6. VoIP and the mobile Internet
2009 will be the year that the inherent tension between the broadband
mobile internet and traditional mobile voice revenues becomes fully
evident and starts to have major effects. The maturation of open
source mobile platforms, such as G1 Android or OpenMoko, coupled with
the spread of WiFi compatible phones, high-speed mobile networks, the
explosion of the netbooks market this year and the greater adoption of
data communication capabilities by consumers in developed countries,
all will force mobile carriers to make a fateful choice. Either adopt
net neutrality principles and allow widespread adoption of VOIP
clients (e.g., Fring), or depart from NN principles and try to
preserve the remnants of their higher-margin circuit-switched voice
traffic. That policy issue will play out more in national arenas than
in global ones, which means that the results will be diverse, but an
increasingly globalized advocacy of NN as a principle could play an
important role in the mix.

7. Can the ITU World Telecom Policy Forum revive WSIS?
The ITU is as determined as ever to retain its relevance in an
Internet-dominated world. Its World Telecom Policy Forum, to be held
in Lisbon, Portugal April 22-24, 2009, plans to deal extensively with
Internet governance issues. If the ITU is smart, it will try to open
these proceedings to civil society and lure other new actors into its
venues, actors who may be less than thrilled with the progress of the
Internet Governance Forum and less than supportive of ICANN. The WTPF
could become a place for governments and other actors unsure about or
dissatisfied with the IGF/ICANN-centered regime to air their
grievances and attempt to develop an alternative center of policy
discourse, if not policy power. Can the ITU really become
multistakeholder? Granted, that will take more than one year…

8. Will Governments make ISP intermediaries for security?
Over the past years, there have been increasing calls for governments
to put more pressure on ISPs to improve their security practices.
After years of focusing on end users with awareness raising campaigns
and education, it has become clear that such efforts cannot keep up
with the changes in internet abuse and cybercrime. Now the focus is
shifiting to intermediaries. ISPs are at the top of the list. The
Dutch regulator OPTA threatened to introduce regulation, then
backtracked and talked about a quality mark or certification scheme.
The British House of Lords made similar recommendations. In Australia,
ACMA already has enforceable codes of conducts for ISPs. It also
notifies ISPs directly about abuse and requires them to act on these
notifications. These examples are just the first steps of governments
exploring what role they can have or want to have when it comes to
internet security.

• Email to a friend • Article Search • •

IGF Workshop Report: "The Future of ICANN: After the JPA, What?"

ICANN, which coordinates and sets policy for the global domain name
system (DNS) and IP addressing, is linked to the US Government through
a Joint Project Agreement (JPA) that expires in September 2009. The
JPA and its renewal process provides what, during WSIS, became known
as "political oversight" over ICANN. The US government says that it is
committed to "completing the transition" to private sector
coordination of the DNS, which implies an expiration of the JPA.
During the 2008 mid-term review, ICANN made it clear that it also
strongly supports an end to the JPA. ICANN's call was supported by
some stakeholders. Other parties, however, expressed concerns about
its accountability without some kind of governmental oversight.

This workshop, held on Wednesday December 4, 2008 at the Internet
Governance Forum in Hyderabad, India, was designed to provide a
careful and balanced exploration of whether ICANN is ready to be free
of US government oversight, and if so what kind of external oversight
- if any - should replace it.

• Email to a friend • Article Search • •

Europe pioneers IPv4 address transfer markets

The European regional Internet address registry, RIPE-NCC, has finally
passed an IPv4 address transfer policy. This means that a legal market
for trading in rapidly-depleting IPv4 address resources will go into
effect for any member of RIPE-NCC. To discourage speculation, the
proposal retains a simple form of needs assessment and prevents buyers
of address resources from reselling them for two years. RIPE's
decisive action contrasts markedly with the contentious drama
surrounding IPv4 transfer markets in the North American region. After
months and months of debate ARIN is still paralyzed and riven by
ideological disagreements. However, the implementation of the idea in
the European region will provide a chance to prove the concept. It is
also possible that the RIPE market will turn into a global one, as
addresses can be transferred by any RIPE member, and it is (we think)
possible for Internet service providers from outside the region to
join RIPE. For a description of the new policy see section 5.5 of RIPE
NCC's IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies.

• Email to a friend • Article Search • •

One Good Outcome from the Wall Street Journal - Google Flap

The Wall Street Journal published an article alleging that Google was
trying to arrange a "fast lane for its own content" with telecom
carriers and contending that Google and Professor Lessig were in the
midst of changing their position on network neutrality policy. The WSJ
reporters received a lot of flak for the piece - justifiably so. The
WSJ's sudden interest in the topic seemed more like an attempt to
poison the well as the Obama Administration and its net
neutrality-friendly team ascends to power. There is one useful outcome
of this incident, however.

• Email to a friend • Article Search • •

________________________________
Click here to safely unsubscribe now from "IGP Blog" or change
subscription settings
________________________________
________________________________
Your requested content delivery powered by FeedBlitz, LLC, 9 Thoreau
Way, Sudbury, MA 01776, USA. +1.978.776.9498
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance