Transcript PowerPoint 프레젠테이션

Internet Governance:
Landscape
2013. 01. 11
Compiled by Dongman Lee
KAIST
TOC
• Internet history
• What is Internet Governance
• ICANN: past, present, and challenges
• ICANN and ITU
• Korean Internet Governance
• Remarks
History of Internet
• http://www.isoc.org/internet/history
Players of the Internet
IAB
IGF
Domain Names
• RFC 1591
Root Zone Management
• DoC NTIA - ultimate owner
– Managed by IANA
– Operated by ICANN (RSSAC)
– Maintained by Verisign
RIR
• IAN) -> RIRs -> ISPs & end-users
• Number Resource Organization (NRO) ->
ASO
Internet Governance
• Wikipedia
– Internet governance is the development
and application of shared principles, norms,
rules, decision-making procedures, and
programs that shape the evolution and use
of the Internet
– Bottom-up & multi-stake holder
• Consensus-driven
• end users, experts, commercial orgs, noncommercial orgs, government, etc.
ICANN: Birth
• IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee)
– Formed by ISOC, IAB, IANA, ITU, WIPO. and
INTA in 1996
– Released a report on gTLD-MOU in 1997
• Transition to a non-profit org
– Green paper in 1998 by Ira Magaziner
• “a reasonable and orderly transition" to a new
nonprofit organization, notionally labeled NewCo or
the new IANA
– White paper in 1998 by US DoC NTIA
• "an ad hoc coalition of professional, trade and
educational associations representing a diversity of
Internet stakeholder groups"
ICANN: Birth
• ICANN established in Oct 1998 as a
corporation under US law
• 1st meeting at LA in 1999
– Ratification of a proposed agreement
between ICANN and NSI
ICANN: Structure
ICANN: Timeline
• 2000: new gTLDs introduction
– .biz, .info, .museum, …
– Controlled expansion
– UDRP
• 2009: untie legal binding with DoC
– No direct control by DoC
– Really? … IANA
• 2012: unlimited and multilingual gTLDs
– No more strict population control
– URS & Trademark clearinghouse
– Many loopholes..
ICANN: Accountability
• ICANN’s regulatory activities
– Price setting: base price setting for DNs
– Registrar/Registry accreditation
– New public offerings: new gTLDs
– Power of enforcement: dispute resolutions
→ conflict with governments and intergovernmental organizations
IG in Korea
Academic Community Led
1986 – 1994 : Operated by KAIST
Civil society led cooperation
1994 – 1999 : Operated by NCA
Independent organization established
1999 – 2004 : Operated by KRNIC
Legislation – government takeover
2004 – 2009 : Address Law, NIDA
Government led cooperation, Role Expansion
2009 – Current : KISA
Academic Society Led
1986 – 1994 : KAIST operated
• 1986 .kr assigned
Civil
Society
• KAIST operates DNS
• 1988 Academic Network Committee
• 1993 KRNIC established
Private
Sector
Government
Sector
Civil Society Led Cooperation
1994 – 1999 : NCA Operated
Civil
Society
• ANC becomes KNC
• 1998: RFP-KR documentation Begins
Private
Sector
Government
Sector
• NCA operates DNS
Independent Organization
1999 – 2004 : KRNIC Operated
Civil
Society
• Policy: NNC, Namecom
Private
Sector
• KRNIC established, operates .kr
Government
Sector
• MIC (Ministry of Information and Communication)
overlooks KRNIC
Legislation – government
2004 – 2009 : Address Law
Civil
Society
• Members of the related councils
Private
Sector
• KRNIC becomes NIDA (National Internet
Development Agency)
Government
Sector
• NIDA reports directly to MIC
• 2008: MIC becomes KCC
Government led cooperation
2009 – 2012 : Merged KISA
Civil
Society
• Internet Governance Forum begins
• Central role in implementing kr IDN
Private
Sector
• NIDA merges with KISA (Korea Internet Security
Agency), expands
Government
Sector
• KISA reports directly to KCC
Internet Governance in Korea at
Work
 Implementation of IDN ccTLD
 Discussion within KISA advisory committee
 Discussion within Internet Governance Forum
 Government recognized the need for a multi-stakeholder model
 Composed of members of former NNC, the civil society-led effort
 Substantial discussion on relationship between ASCII IDN TLD,
registration policy, whois policy, reserved names, etc.
 Significant influence on the implementation of .한국.
Governmental Legislation and
Participation
 Makes us weary
 Negative Aspects
 Loss of community voice
 Multistakeholder model not sustained
 Positive Aspects
 Government recognition of multistakeholder model
 Voice of national soveignty strengthened
A New Player – UN?
• UN WSIS (2005)
– Should ICANN or U.S. gov control the
Internet?
– Freedom of expression?
– Separate funding pool for the technology
gap [digital divide] between richer and
poorer nations?
-> evolved into IGF
ITU and WCIT
• WCIT (World Conference on International
Telecommunications) 2012
– ITR revision
– Security included except ICT
– Implications
• Developed vs Developing
Remarks
• Develop Korean IG best practices
– Balance between partnership and
auditorship
• Active participation in online and offline
IG local & international activities
– KIGA IIC
– ICANN GNSO NCSG & ALAC
– ISOC
– IGF
References
www.icann.org
www.ietf.org
www.iab.org
www.w3c.org
http://www.apc.org/en/system/files/CivilSociety_ICANN.pdf
• http://www.internetgovernance.org/wordpre
ss/wp-content/uploads/ICANN-ReformEstablishing-the-Rule-of-Law.pdf
• http://www.caslon.com.au/icannprofile4.htm
•
•
•
•
•