Slashdot Mirror


ICANN Writes US Government Requesting Independence

Combat Wombat writes with word that IP address and domain name overseer ICANN has put in a request to the US government, asking to be freed from ties to the United States. A 'lengthy' report was sent to the US Dept. of Commerce, and covers the numerous steps the organization has already completed along the road to independence. The BBC reports that a meeting will be held soon in response to the report, a reaction to the expected end of US control. "The meeting marks the half-way point for the Joint Project Agreement (JPA) under which ICANN was tasked to comply with a series of 'responsibilities' deemed necessary for its release from official oversight. The JPA grew out of the original Memorandum of Understanding that established Icann and signalled the beginning of the end for US control."

27 of 131 comments (clear)

  1. From the Office of His Imperial Majesty by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Funny
    Dear ICANNN,

    No.

    Sincerely,
    George W. Bush

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:From the Office of His Imperial Majesty by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ya know, as easy as it is to take potshots at Dubya, I think you've largely missed a legitimate concern.

      So ICANN wants to be released from oversight by the United States. Great. I bet that makes a lot of people around here happy. What's it going to be replaced with exactly? Do you really want an ICANN without any oversight?

      Say what you will about the United States and the current arrangement, but at least at the end of the day ICANN is responsible to SOMEONE. That 'someone' is in turn responsible to 300,000,000 Americans. While 300,000,000 != the whole population of Earth, it's a hellva lot better then ICANN being responsible to no one in my book.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:From the Office of His Imperial Majesty by HangingChad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ya know, as easy as it is to take potshots at Dubya...

      I don't think this is limited to him and I don't think it means the rest of the world hates the US. I do think it says the rest of the world no longer trusts the US. And in some ways that's worse than hatred. It's definitely sad testimony to what we've become in the eyes of the rest of the world. Instead of being trusted to work cooperatively with other sovereign nations we've pretty much declared, by our actions if not by words, that our pursuit of terrorism trumps every other concern, legitimate or not.

      And it's not just government actions. AT&T threatening to charge at both ends of the pipe and cooperating in warrant-less monitoring of internet and phone traffic on a massive scale. Several of the core ISP's threatening to block certain kinds of traffic. It could easily be a combination of corporate dickishness and the privacy insults we've foisted on the rest of the world and they're just tired of it.

      --
      That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    3. Re:From the Office of His Imperial Majesty by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 3, Interesting

      it's not a good idea to arbitrarily remove the oversight that it currently has.

      Okay, I'll bite. I've been hearing this argument for a while, but nobody mentions what form this oversight really takes. It also begs another question: How useful is this oversight? Can it do anything about the US government and the telcos working hand in hand to wiretap the shit out of the internet? Can it do anything about the telco lobbies who want to bend network neutrality to their own profitable ends?

      If losing ICANN oversight is such a big deal, make your case. It seems like the internet's pretty much fucked either way, so how useful are they anyway?

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    4. Re:From the Office of His Imperial Majesty by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Can it do anything about the US government and the telcos working hand in hand to wiretap the shit out of the internet

      Exactly what would you have ICANN do about this? It's the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. It's most important role is to manage the dns root and address allocations in such a way that the end users don't conflict with each other.

      What exactly is ICANN to do if AT&T decides to let the NSA splice into some fiber? Are you going to blame the ITU for wiretapping of the POTS network? Do you really think the United States is the only country that wiretaps on the internet?

      I'm probably making your point here, but the counter-argument is that if ICANN is so useless why are people in such an uproar about it? Somebody has to manage the dns root and ip address allocations. Beyond those two functions, pretty much any country that's connected to the internet can do whatever they want with the portions of it inside of their own borders.

      Let's assume the US did try and assert authority over the internet. How would it do that exactly?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  2. Won't happen. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As much as it might be good for the Internet, it will never happen. ICANN is considered a strategic U.S. asset. Everyone seems to be forgetting that the Internet started out as a project of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. The government is not going to give up control that easily.

    1. Re:Won't happen. by farkus888 · · Score: 2, Informative

      a long long time ago darpa was the only entity on the internet. then universities came on, and now its everybody. if you think darpa still has their mission critical systems on the internet you are mistaken. rolling out your own backbone has become simple and cheap enough that its worth it for them for the increased security that keeping their data out of the internet cloud provides.

      --
      thats right, I rarely use capitals. deal with it. but don't mistake my laziness for stupidity
    2. Re:Won't happen. by Slashidiot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thing is, if it does not happen, countries will end up having their own ICANN equivalents, and therefore, the role now played by ICANN would be played by some kind of group or comitee, formed by every ICANN equivalent in the world... and you'll end up with a UN equivalent, and getting as good performance as with the UN.

      --
      Tis women makes us love, Tis Love that makes us sad, Tis sadness makes us drink, And drinking makes us mad.
    3. Re:Won't happen. by Jesus_666 · · Score: 2, Informative

      And if the USA ever decides to use ths asset agains someone, they instantly lose it. Europe is already immune; we could just switch over to ORSN and decide to ignore US standards on IP address usage. Other regions/countries can set up alternative DNS roots as well.

      ICANN is not much of an asset because the USA have to cooperate with everyone anyway, lest they want the internet to fragment.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    4. Re:Won't happen. by VGPowerlord · · Score: 2, Informative
      I don't mean to sound rude, but do you actually understand where ICANN's power comes from? What ICANN inherited from IANA is this:
      1. Control of the IPv4 global distribution. IANA (now ICANN) assigns IP blocks to the 5 Regional Internet Registries: ARIN (North America), RIPE (Europe), APNIC (Asia and Australia), LACNIC (Central and South America), and AfriNIC (Africa).
      2. Control of the contents of the A root DNS server.

      The control of one is used to keep control of the other. ICANN equivalents wouldn't have either of these, and thus not have either the power or the leverage to enforce their edicts.

      Since ICANN controls both, wresting one of those away would be very difficult. It'd be better off trying to take away both at once. The problem then is... who would control them next?
      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
  3. You mean.. like the United Nations? by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ICANN has put in a request to the US government, asking to be freed from ties to the United States.

    Yeah, like that's going to happen. The United Nations is supposedly meant to be independent from the US, but in reality is just a puppet organization held up by the US. Even organizations that aren't based in the US are inevitably tied to the goings-ons of the US from economic, trade, or cultural points of view, such as, say, the Bank of England. Given the US owns the largest swathes of IP address space, I can't see any official or semi-official ties (whether legal or cultural) with the US being cut any time soon.

    1. Re:You mean.. like the United Nations? by Fifty+Points · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The UN isn't controlled by the US. If it was, the US would not so often ignore it and dismiss it as irrelevant. (See: Invasion and Occupation of Iraq)

      --
      I'm in between insightful sigs right now...
    2. Re:You mean.. like the United Nations? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2, Funny

      If the UN is supposed to be a US puppet organization, all I can say is the US should demand its money back.

    3. Re:You mean.. like the United Nations? by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The United Nations is supposedly meant to be independent from the US

      Blame this guy. Little known fact: The original idea behind the UN did not grant veto power to the "big five". The Allies agreed to allow it in order to convince the Soviet Union to join.

      but in reality is just a puppet organization held up by the US

      Really? Is that why the General Assembly applauded Hugo Chavez after his little tirade? Is that why we can't even stop resolutions like Zionism == racism? Hell, native New Yorker complaint time: Is that why the bastards think they are above local laws that apply to every other American citizen?

      Even organizations that aren't based in the US are inevitably tied to the goings-ons of the US from economic, trade, or cultural points of view, such as, say, the Bank of England

      And it's our fault that our economy and culture are that successful? Would you have had the same complaints about Great Britain a few decades ago or is it only fashionable to whine about American dominance?

      Nobody put a gun to the head of the teenagers of the World and made them listen to Britney Spears, wear blue jeans and drink Starbucks coffee. For whatever reason American culture seems to be popular in parts of the World. I fail to see why we should apologize for that.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    4. Re:You mean.. like the United Nations? by KutuluWare · · Score: 4, Funny

      Nobody put a gun to the head of the teenagers of the World and made them listen to Britney Spears, wear blue jeans and drink Starbucks coffee. For whatever reason American culture seems to be popular in parts of the World. I fail to see why we should apologize for that.


      Well, if you won't, then please allow ME to personally apologize to the world for Britney Spears.

      --K
  4. It's not going to by techpawn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But with China and Russia making their own ICANN of sorts it seems to make sense for ICANN to become a free and neutral international department. If it's going to be a WORLD WIDE WEB for much longer and not the US tubes, EURAsia tubes, Russia tubes, and China Tubes something has to give now.

    ICANN becoming their own international organization with no country has to be one of those things.

    --
    Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
    1. Re:It's not going to by cHiphead · · Score: 2, Insightful

      nd what exactly is the problem with each country asserting control over the internet within it's own borders?

      The internet is too goddamn important to allow each country to assert such stringent control to create an isolated DNS/IP/access control within its own borders. This is a worldwide phenomenon, isolationi leads to disagreement without conciliatory resolution leads to war.

      Note: I also think ICANN is a raging pile of crap, its corporate control instead of government, at least with a government agency we can require full disclosure without the ability for the corporation to hide behind constitutional rights to privacy, etc.

      Cheers.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  5. Re:And it's time to CANN .mil and .gov by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Funny

    Unless the United States is trying to be the Ruler of the World it's time to move to .mil.us and .gov.us like everyone else.

    Yes, because in the grand scheme of things with everything that's going on in the World, ranging from the War in Iraq to the Genocide in Darfur, the fact that the United States has global TLDs not ending in .us is really a priority that the World community needs to address.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  6. Some generals were getting a tour of the Internet by MichaelCrawford · · Score: 2, Funny
    ... at one of the major backbone facilities. One of the generals asked the guide - who later related this to a class I took at Interop - how the MILNet could be separated from the rest of the Internet in times of war.

    Before the guide could answer, another general replied:

    Explosive bolts.
    --
    Request your free CD of my piano music.
  7. To what end? by Joseph+Vigneau · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If ICANN succeeds and gains "independence" from the US Dept. of Commerce, what would change? Has the US government imposed any restrictions on the activities of ICANN while under its wings? Most of the issues dealt with by the government involving the Internet are independent of ICANN's charter. Net neutrality and "protecting the children"/censorship, two of the hot Internet issues in Congress, don't really have much to do with ICANN's workings. Indeed, each nation sets their own policies right now about how their populace uses the global Internet (see: Great Firewall of China).

    The UN probably isn't the best shepherd for ICANN. The ISO seems to be a decent possibility.

  8. Re:And it's time to CANN .mil and .gov by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The rest of us have a sense of perspective

    And your sense of perspective is leading you to whine about the fact that the United States has a few TLDs for itself? Who the hell cares? That's just a fluke of history. If the UK had gotten the internet going then maybe it would be navy.mil.us instead of navy.mil and royal-navy.mod instead of royal-navy.mod.uk.

    You don't see too many Americans whining about the fact that UTC is based on Greenwich Mean Time. The nerve of those Brits to define the Prime Meridian as going through their country. We should change this ASAP.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  9. I hope you're all happy by PinkyDead · · Score: 4, Funny

    With all this time spent arguing about who should control the Internet and how everybody hates the US and how everybody loves the US and how the UN is corrupt and how the UN is not corrupt and how everyone except you is a communist and nobody's a communist and China is a big country and Europeans eat French food and Kim Jong Il wants to use the Internet to enslave all of mankind with sharks and laser beams; not once, not even one single time did anyone stop and ask ICANN what they wanted.

    Shame on you all!

    --
    Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!
  10. All your ICANN are belong to US by imyy4u1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Haha, for once the saying actually applies...literally. All your ICANN are belong to US.

    --
    "Know but never fear the consequences of your actions."
  11. Re:They only have control by Smidge204 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't suppose you can elaborate on exactly WHY and HOW a multinational organization would be an improvement? ICANN is already run by a board of directors composed of people from all over the globe who represent their own international interests. It also takes advice both from a committee which represents even more governments from around the world and another committee that represents organizations and industries across the globe.

    On top of that, the US government has little or not actual control over ICANN's daily oerations. The cat is out of the bag, sort of speak, and there is no way the US government can effectively control the internet as a whole even if it wanted to, since the rest of the world is sufficiently set up to operate without it - with the exception of content services based in the US, which are privately controlled anyway.

    So other than the generic "USA sux" metality, what's the motivation for total globalization of ICANN's functions? What will this accomplish other than create another incompetent, ineffectual and political circle-jerk like the United Nations?
    =Smidge=

  12. Lol : "some international" or "country neutral" by da5idnetlimit.com · · Score: 2, Insightful

    U.N.

    Largest body of countries, International.

    Now, if you grew wary of the american policies concerning ICAAN, get ready for bitchslapping at a worldwide level.

    --
    It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
    1. Re:Lol : "some international" or "country neutral" by readin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      U. N. is "international" but it is hardly "country neutral". Just ask anybody from Taiwan.

      --
      I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
  13. You've got it all wrong by TimeTraveler1884 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...the fact that the United States has global TLDs not ending in .us is really a priority that the World community needs to address.
    I think you are missing the GP's point. He's saying that because the United States has global TLDs not ending in .us, we have the war in Iraq and genocide in Darfur. Which makes sense if you don't think about it.