ICANN Reform
STRENGTHENS AND SECURES THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE INTERNET

Sen. Burns will take aim at the organization’s persistent half-hearted efforts at internal reform. The lack of accountability of this quasi-governmental organization poses serious problems for American national security. The recent “denial of service” (DOS) attack on nine of the 13 Internet “root servers” in October highlights these concerns. Constitutional issues are also troubling, including whether the Commerce Department was within its rights to grant such a huge responsibility to ICANN in the first place, potentially violating the “nondelegation” clause.

This issue demands immediate oversight. Sen. Burns will hold a hearing on ICANN Reform in the spring to address potential legislation to authorize ICANN’s continued existence.

But what about the other perspective -- the global Internet perspective? Is this good for the Internet? I think so, but over at the ICANN Blog Bret Fausett expresses doubts. Here's his argument:

"an announcement like this is self-defeating. One of the most vital issues remaining with ICANN Reform -- solidifying relationships with the ccTLDs, RIRs, and root server operators -- is bound to be impacted adversely by the spectre of possible legislation over "ICANN's continued existence." If ICANN has failed in its mission, and if it fails at reform, part of the blame must go to Congress and the DOC. Without a clear path to privatization backed by a promise from the U.S. to give up aspects of its control, how can ICANN possibly gain the full and voluntary participation of those stakeholders residing outside the U.S.?"

ICANN has taken the view that the reason it is so messed up is all the spanners thrown into the works by those same dissenters. It is conceivable that having seen them off, ICANN will blossom into an enlightened engineer-lawyer-king of the DNS. The odds of this, alas, are about on par with one's chances of winning the lottery.

The ONLY remaining substantial external checks on ICANN are (1) the ccTLDs (the RIRs are in theory a major check, but they have powerful incentives not to rock the boat these days, contract or no contract)and (2) the US government.

DoC is not focused on the job. The NTIA simply has too many other priorities that it ranks higher. Thus, we need Senator Burns to hold ICANN's feet to the fire -- there's almost no one else.

But what about the argument that the uncertainty created by the threat of hearings -- and maybe even legislation -- undermines ICANN's ability to get on with the job? I think, with all respect, the ICANN Blog has got this one backwards: what is undermined is only ICANN's ability to intimidate. What is increased is ICANN's incentive (otherwise almost non-existent, cf. the last 4 years!) to come to reasonable terms with the ccTLDs so that it can present DoC and Burns with a fait accompli. Look for a flurry of deals in the weeks before the hearing.

I'll make another rash prediction. Between now and the end of the next ICANN meeting, ICANN will do something so high handed that even the ICANN Blog will be cross. Things have been quiet of late. It's like sunspots. We're due.