The president can do this without Congress? 
Posted on 07/01/2005 6:07:22 AM PDT by janetjanet998
NEW YORK - The U.S. government will indefinitely retain oversight of the main computers that control traffic on the Internet, ignoring calls by some countries to turn the function over to an international body, a senior official said Thursday.
The announcement marked a departure from previously stated U.S. policy.
Michael D. Gallagher, assistant secretary for communications and information at the Commerce Department, shied away from terming the declaration a reversal, calling it instead "the foundation of U.S. policy going forward."
"The signals and words and intentions and policies need to be clear so all of us benefiting in the world from the Internet and in the U.S. economy can have confidence there will be continued stewardship," Gallagher said in an interview with The Associated Press.
He said the declaration, officially made in a four-paragraph statement posted online, was in response to growing security threats and increased reliance on the Internet globally for communications and commerce.
The computers in question serve as the Internet's master directories and tell Web browsers and e-mail programs how to direct traffic. Internet users around the world interact with them every day, likely without knowing it. Policy decisions could at a stroke make all Web sites ending in a specific suffix essentially unreachable.
Though the computers themselves — 13 in all, known as "root" servers — are in private hands, they contain government-approved lists of the 260 or so Internet suffixes, such as ".com."
In 1998, the Commerce Department selected a private organization with international board members, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, to decide what goes on those lists. Commerce kept veto power, but indicated it would let go once ICANN met a number of conditions.
Thursday's declaration means Commerce would keep that control, regardless of whether and when those conditions are met.
"It's completely an about-face if you consider the original commitment made when ICANN was created," said Milton Mueller, a Syracuse University professor who has written about policies surrounding the Internet's root servers.
ICANN officials said they were still reviewing Commerce's statement, which also expressed continued support of ICANN for day-to-day operations.
The declaration won't immediately affect Internet users, but it could have political ramifications by putting in writing what some critics had already feared.
Michael Froomkin, a University of Miami professor who helps run an independent ICANN watchdog site, said the date for relinquishing control has continually slipped.
Some countries, he said, might withdraw support they had for ICANN on the premise it would one day take over the root servers.
In a worst-case scenario, countries refusing to accept U.S. control could establish their own separate Domain Name System and thus fracture the Internet into more than one network. That means two users typing the same domain name could reach entirely different Web sites, depending on where they are.
The announcement comes just weeks before a U.N. panel is to release a report on Internet governance, addressing such issues as oversight of the root servers, ahead of November's U.N. World Summit on the Information Society in Tunisia.
Some countries have pressed to move oversight to an international body, such as the U.N. International Telecommunication Union, although the U.S. government has historically had that role because it funded much of the Internet's early development.
Ambassador David Gross, the U.S. coordinator for international communications and information policy at the State Department, insisted that Thursday's announcement was unrelated to those discussions.
But he said other countries should see the move as positive because "uncertainty is not something that we think is in the United States' interest or the world's interest."
Gallagher noted that Commerce endorses having foreign governments manage their own country-code suffixes, such as ".fr" for France.
You mean we're not just going to hand over all control to the U.N.? Wow, this is a pleasant surprise!
Is there any doubt who would be immediately given power over these computers should Hitlery become our next president?
Thanks for the post.
Good. At least some people still have balls here.
Reliance on a single conceptual root is just a convention (though a better one than the old days where people ftp'd in the latest hosts.txt) in using the DNS protocol.
There's nothing that I find particularly worrisome about groups setting up alternate root servers serving alternate roots.
Notice they can't just say 'No' and 'Yes'. They say, 'Yes, I believe 2 caring people should be allowed to get married' or something like unto it, an 'no'. Casting us as coldhearted cruel people with no compassion. Just a point of interest...
WRONG FORUM IDIOT
The president can do this without Congress?
ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US!
Fragmentation ? Well, the French have 300 kinds of stinky cheese. Africans have their drums...
We invented the Internet! We use the Internet! It is ours! Nobody else will lay his clammy hands on it!
If they don't like it, they can build their own damn internet!
The USA is probably footing all the bill, so we should be the ones that call the shots.
Thank you Al Gore for inventing the internet!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kinda cool." - WJ Clinton
Having to do with executive orders. Ratification of treaties with foreign powers requires congressional action. My understanding is that any present treaties we have with the UN and our membership therein can't be stretched to cover ceding new areas of sovereignty. Like the other treaties we have with that organization, a new one would have to be ratified.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.