Plan for UN to run internet 'will be shelved'

[dem4everydoor]

An attempt by developing countries to put management of the internet under United Nations auspices is likely to be shelved at next month's world information summit in Geneva - but the issue is now firmly on the international agenda, summit sources say.


http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1066565743698&p=1012571727102

How many here want the UN running the Internet?

[htuttle]

1. That's an interesting question

Right now, the internet is 'run' by a group of engineering associations (ie, the IETF, IEEE, etc...). At least they sort of 'run' the internet, since they determine the really important stuff that makes it work, like protocols, transports, standards, etc...

There's another aspect to 'running' the internet that involves things like domain names -- right now, that's mostly been privatized (through an entirely chaotic process most similar to a 'gold rush', I might add).

And then there's the concept of regulation of the content of the internet, and that's a relatively new development. The internet got along just fine for many years without any regulation of content whatsoever (well, nearly...).

The article linked blends two of those together, and totally ignores the first one (the important stuff that nobody but Microsoft really argues about).

Icann (and the entire process of assigning IP blocks and domain names) hasn't been the good steward that a lot of people hoped it would be (hey, you in the back, stop laughing), and the privatization processes they've used are responsible for a lot of spam all of us probably get.

Regarding the issue of IP block assignments, which could well 'run out' in the near future if demand holds, there's a technological solution already available. It's called 'IPv6', it's new! it's smart! it's got security built in! It has access to a much, much larger pool of available IP addresses. Unfortunately, it requires the software industry to work for the common good to get everything switched. There is a chicken and egg situation with it: No reason to switch until a critical mass switches to IPv6, and there won't be a critical mass until more people switch. It has been the same with a lot of other technology over the years, but switching the whole net from IPv4 to IPv6 is like resurfacing the entire Interstate Highway System while there are still cars driving on it.

And then the article throws in the whole content regulation bit, and that doesn't seem to be what the group that wants to have the UN take over Icann's job wants. That is said to be what 'many governments' are 'convinced is needed'. Yes, I bet they do...

I guess, like many things, the devil is in the details. There are things that would really work better if they were handled by the UN -- IP block assignments would be a natural one -- and there are others that would not (and should not), and there are other things that shouldn't be regulated at all.

[Walt Starr]

2. It's a lot better idea than the thought of John Ashcroft running it!

And I guarantee you, if Bush steals a second term, Ashcroft will be running the internet.

[hang a left]

3. If the Supreme Court rules for the Administration in the

Guantanamo case. Then it really is all over. There will be many "enemy combatants" in cyberspace.

[Gman]

4. Sure, why not

anything to keep Ashcroft's filthy hands off of it.

In fact, that's a damn good idea.

[Gephard]

5. U.N.?

No thank you.

[hunter]

6. How does one "run the internet?"

Nobody "runs" the internet. Different entities loosely control different aspects of it, but even that can be very fluid.

That's just the way it is unless privately owned general purpose computers were made illegal.

"If the internet is outlawed, only outlaws will have the internet."

Or some such silliness.

People build computers, people connect computers together, you have an internet.

If you don't know how to do that, you pay someone else to do that. I suppose you could make it illegal to buy unregulated and unauthorized internet connections, but then you would have something very similar to the "war on drugs," with police busting down the doors of people who are "growing" their own internets, confiscating computers, etc.

Which is something to worry about, isn't it?

[LifeDuringWartime]

7. very worrisome, indeed

they'll pry the mouse from my cold, dead hands.