[IP] more on U.N vs. The Internet
Delivered-To: dfarber+@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 12:39:38 -0500
From: L Jean Camp <jean_camp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [IP] U.N vs. The Internet
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
The reasons for this are, in part, the fact that the less you have the
more you pay to connect to the network. Peering arrangements are private
contracts that determine rates based on the ability of the party to
negotiate in a commercial setting. Tariffs determine the cost of
interconnection through negotiated settlements.
"An ISP's primary connectivity is usually initially through metered and
paid for Transit via another larger network. However, once an ISP's network
grows and reaches a certain size it is possible to negotiate peering
agreements to connect directly with other ISPs that have a similar level of
traffic flow. The peering agreement allows customers of both networks to
reach sites on either network directly and thus potentially much faster as
it avoids the need to go via other networks that may be congested.
Therefore, an ISP's performance can be substantially enhanced by
identifying & entering peering agreements to connect directly with other
networks that trade particularly large volumes of traffic with their own."
You can see the implications for a small poor nation with a small network.
You can see why the representatives of those nations, the civil society
activists, and the development community think having the commercial sector
making the rules will not be in their best interests. Since the commercial
sector (rationally) leverages their power to extract maximum payment from
smaller players, it is no longer reasonable to call on ethos of the
Internet to protect those who are disadvantaged in these negotiations.
Every action has an equal but opposite reaction. This one was just delayed.
regards,
Jean
On Friday, December 5, 2003, at 08:14 AM, Dave Farber wrote:
washingtonpost.com
U.N. Summit to Focus on Internet
Officials to Discuss Shifting of Control to International Body
By David McGuire
Special to The Washington Post
Friday, December 5, 2003; Page E05
Leaders from almost 200 countries will convene next week in Geneva to
discuss whether an international body such as the United Nations should be
in charge of running the Internet, which would be a dramatic departure
from the current system, managed largely by U.S. interests.
The representatives, including the heads of state of France, Germany and
more than 50 other countries, are expected to attend the World Summit on
the Information Society, which also is to analyze the way that Web site
and e-mail addresses are doled out, how online disputes are resolved and
the thorny question of how to tax Internet-based transactions.
Many developing nations complain that the world's most visible Internet
governance body -- the U.S.-based Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
and Numbers (ICANN) -- does not adequately represent their interests and
should be scrapped in favor of a group allied with the United Nations.
A nonprofit company based in Marina del Rey, Calif., ICANN oversees the
Internet's addressing system under an agreement with the U.S. government.
The U.S. private sector controls about 85 percent of the Internet's
underlying infrastructure.
"Because this is taking place in a U.N. summit, the commercial sector is
not yet fully aware of the implications this has for the Internet," said
Marilyn S. Cade, director of Internet and e-commerce, law and government
affairs at AT&T Corp.
Companies such as AT&T say the Internet has benefited from ICANN's ability
to set policies and resolve disputes quickly with minimal government
oversight, but some countries complain that the United States wields too
much control over ICANN and that the body is unresponsive to their needs.
"That sentiment is very much out there . . . and although [ICANN] has
evolved and has tried to bring in a lot of engagement from a lot of
places, there have to be ways to open up the process even a little bit
more," said Sarbuland Khan, head of the United Nations' Information and
Communications Technology Task Force.
Khan said world governments, for instance, have no central authority to
coordinate rules for Internet security and taxing online transactions.
He added that the U.N. is not trying to transfer ICANN's powers to its own
International Telecommunications Union (ITU), as some countries have
advocated, but he conceded that such recommendations would be on the table
in Geneva.
ICANN Chairman Vinton G. Cerf said the group has been unfairly made the
focal point of all criticism relating to Internet administration, even in
areas where it was never intended to have a say.
"The bizarre argument that gets made: What ICANN does is Internet
governance, and since ICANN doesn't deal with all those other issues, it's
not doing its job and let's replace it with the ITU," Cerf said.
Cerf said that the United Nations could address Internet security and
taxation, but should leave control over the Internet's addressing system
to ICANN.
That is the point of view of the U.S. government, which will send
representatives to the Geneva meeting.
"We believe that Internet governance should continue to be coordinated and
led by the private sector, and we remain committed to working with ICANN
to ensure that Internet governance remains balanced among all
stakeholders," said Clyde Ensslin, a spokesman for the Commerce
Department, which oversees ICANN.
Tom Galvin, director of government relations for U.S. Internet giant
VeriSign Inc., said the meeting could help resolve lingering questions
about how much power ICANN should have.
VeriSign administers the .com and .net Internet domains and is overseen by
ICANN. The two organizations have clashed repeatedly since ICANN's launch
in 1998.
Khan said the main purpose of the conference is to agree on a set of goals
for promoting improved Internet governance and development. The ITU won't
made its final policy decisions until the second half of the summit
meeting, set to take place in Tunis, Tunisia, in 2005.
David McGuire is a reporter for washingtonpost.com
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as Jean_Camp@xxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/