1. Internet Organizations: A study in political science Fred Baker Chair, ISOC Cisco Fellow

2. “There are two things you don’t want to see being made—sausage and legislation.” Attributed to Otto von Bismark (1815-1898)

3. Organizational Chart Organizations in the Internet W3C IABIESG The RIRs Standards Bodies Service Organizations Government Interest IRTF

4. Address Prefix Assignment IETF specified structure of an IPv4 or IPv6 prefix ICANN (historically IANA) assigns them to Regional Internet Registries RIRs Develop assignment policy Assign to local NICs, or ISPs, or edge networks Local NICs assign to ISPs or edge networks

5. DNS Name Management ICANN assigns TLDs to registrars NSI, ccTLD Operators, etc TLD registrars work with registries to allocate domain names Domain name holders are on their own

6. Who makes sure this much works? ICANN is responsible for the correct operation of its functions US Department of Commerce Maintains a “parental” finger in the game Participates in root zone changes Lots of worried people comment – all the time

7. Protocol Identifier Management IETF owns its protocols IAB Charters IANA IANA (now) assigns protocol identifiers ICANN current operator of the IANA function That could change

8. Standards Bodies “The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.” ISOC and IETF formally related Standards bodies have various views of their own and each other’s roles, which do not agree W3C

9. Necessity and importance of RIRs: RIPE, ARIN, APNIC IETF World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) ITU-T 3GPP/3GPP2 ETSI IEEE ICANN US Department of Commerce NTIA Internet Society (ISOC)

10. Necessity and importance of RIRs: RIPE, ARIN, APNIC Current address structure: One or more address prefixes per ISP or multihomed edge network Requires Someone to assign the prefixes A venue for multiprovider policy discussions

11. Necessity and importance of ICANN and registrars TLD structure requires Someone to be a registrar Someone to maintain root zone Is ICANN the only way to manage the root? ITU-T would like to do it DOC NTIA might think it could Alternate root operators suggest roots with random content A certified organization could manage it In short: Someone must manage root; need not be ICANN

12. Necessity and importance of US DoC NTIA DoC thinks US started the Internet and Is responsible to make sure it runs DoC says It would like to step out of parental role It currently doesn’t trust ICANN I think we would agree that someone must ensure that root is preserved Much disagreement about DoC NTIA

13. Necessity and importance of standards bodies There exist many bodies that develop standards used in the Internet. De facto standards: IETF, W3C, IEEE De jure standards: ETSI Tiphon, ITU-T, 3GPP, 3GPP2 De facto vs. De jure It has not been shown that one type of standard is invariably better for technical standards

14. Expertise specific to the Internet W3C develops/maintains HTML/XML IETF has displayed expertise in Internet technology IETF developed elastic Internet model Internet Telephony uses IETF components (SIP, RTP) ITU-T has developed some Internet Telephony: H.323/H.248 Transposition of Telephone model to Internet applications. Few other obvious claims to fame

15. Attempts to cooperate Standards bodies attempt to cooperate: example, ICANN PSO PSO recently dissolved for cause Cooperation is difficult for all organizations Political directions and rivalries Structural differences

16. Regulatory/Policy issues Example: “Should Internet companies be responsible for interconnection to transit, or should they share the cost of a link?” “How should Internet companies divide/gain references in the DNS Root?”

17. Community deeply divided Partially carried on in ICANN now: Limited success ITU-T may be a logical place to have such discussions Viewed with combination of interest and suspicion by various parties

18. Place of Government (A very US mindset) The purpose and goal of government Responsible to its people Economic and Military needs need to be met by common technology Technology Policy Funds research Creates environment for business

19. “I’m from the government and I’m here to help” Can be a means of funding a critical enterprise Deployment of telephone technology in 20 th century largely government initiative Often a recipe for disaster X.25, ISO/OSI (GOSIP), French VideoTex

20. “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Lord Acton, in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton, 1887 The issue with government involvement with standards

21. ITU Direction: 1998 ITU directed to take leadership role in Internet Standardization Zhao formed relationships with IETF Existing relationships with ETSI Viewed by IETF as imperialist policy Concern about demonstrated expertise Largely unsuccessful

22. ITU Plenipotentiary October 2002 The 1988 Treaty will be retained ITU actions related to the Internet can only be Voluntary Recommendations up until a new World Conference. Would not take effect until 2009-2010 Not supported by US, and unlikely to be ratified until 2011 or later European attempts to modify CS/CV related to the Internet unsuccessful.

23. Network Security Resolution asking the ITU to Strengthen the ITU standards work Increase the awareness of the importance of network security The term “security” is not clearly specified; could address integrity of the network, or integrity of communications, or other subjects Impacts: Strengthen ITU-T and ITU-D work already underway

24. ITU view of ICANN Modified Resolution 102 (Management of Domain Names and IP Addresses) calls for the ITU to Take a “significant role” in the international discussions on these topics, including internationalization of domain names Represent Member State interests in these discussions Work with other organization on programs to assist developing countries

25. ITU Website wording ITU Website for PP02 highlighted Resolution 102 progress “ITU claims Internet names” Changed yesterday, “Internet names: A matter for government and private sector”

26. Conclusions Human motivations Organizational infrastructure Technology development Policy development

27. Human motivations in technology We develop technology because a need exists We deploy technology because it works Not because we are told to

28. Much of the organizational infrastructure works Regional Internet Registries Operational internet imperfect but functional Technology Standardization Works best when standardizing existing technology Can be used to develop technology

29. There are serious policy issues IETF is not a good forum for this ICANN problematic ITU would like to help

30. Internet Organizations: A study in political science Fred Baker Chair, ISOC Cisco Fellow