"Internet governance"

[MIKE BURN]

How about thinking of a 1st. "President Of The United Internet"? ))



www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1777458,00.html

(Deutsche Welle)



Europe | 15.11.2005

EU and US at Loggerheads Over Internet Control



The US and Europe are headed for a showdown at a worldwide Internet summit in Tunisia this week. At issue: control over the Internet.



A nonprofit, government-funded organization located in sunny Marina del Rey, California is the root of a brewing conflict between the United States and Europe.



The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), has close ties to the US Department of Commerce and is responsible for assigning domain names and internet suffixes - like ".com", and ".org." The functions give ICANN far too much control over the World Wide Web, say critics from China, to Brazil to, recently, the European Union.



"The 25 EU countries are unanimously demanding a new cooperation model for the Internet, where all interested countries sit at one table to discuss the core questions of the network together," EU Commissioner for Information Society and Media Viviane Reding told the magazine Der Spiegel this week.



The power to shut off a country



On Wednesday, the EU will present its proposal at the World Summit on the Information Society in Tunis, Tunisia. The three-day conference has in the past few years tackled issues like SPAM e-mails and cyber-terrorism. This year, the conflict between the US and the rest of the world on so-called "Internet governance" will likely take center stage.



Twelve of the 13 root servers that make the Internet run are located in the United States. Though ICANN is a private organization with international board members, the Commerce Department can still veto what goes on government -approved lists of the 260 or so internet suffixes, like ".com." Theoretically, the US could simply disconnect the domains of countries, like Iran or North Korea, with which they are feuding.

[DreamTone7]

LOL! Tell these folks to come up with their own root servers and internet! You don't wait until somebody spends a lot of money developing something and then demand control of it. Gimme a break. Countries interested in more control should come up with their own root servers and then cut off all outside sources if they want control of the access in their own countries. The solution lies in their own hands...they just don't want to have to pay for any of it. (And pay they will without the advertising that pays for the internet to back them up.)

[HKRockChick]

I'd much rather it stayed where it was rather than leave it to the tender mercies and interference of some not-so-information-sharing friendly governments.



But if something doesn't happen very quickly in the US to control the right wing fanatics, the US won't be so very information-sharing friendly any more either.

[DreamTone7]

One thing I think America, as a whole, can agree upon is the need for a free internet.



Maybe someday, somebody will thank the United States for it...but I won't be holding my breath.

[MIKE BURN]

Quote:

---

DreamTone7





LOL! Tell these folks to come up with their own root servers and internet!

---

I don't want to burst your bubble, but the Internet is not a American invention.



The British physician Tim Berners-Lee invented the "W3"-web or what we know as the "www" principle. In cooperation with the European CERN Technical Institute, the so called "Hyper Text Transfer Protocol" was invented (http).



Berners-Lee received 2004 the "Millennium" price for his invention in Europe.

[DreamTone7]

No bubble to burst. I'm referring to actually investing the money to set up the system, and the servers involved. Putting money into something and creating it. (Ideas by themselves, without any action taken, are wasted time and energy...they just lay on the floor like dust.)

[MIKE BURN]

The ARPANET, setup by the U.S. military, was a misery as well as the NCP protocol.



That's why somebody had to come up with the TCP/IP protocol to make it work at least (inventors of the TCP/IP are the Americans Vinton G. Cerf und Robert E. Kahn).



However, the up-to-date IP-Version 4 protocol shows it's limitations regarding the possible addressroom. That's why some people from Switzerland had to help to invent the IP-Version 6 which will soon be the new protocol standard.



BTW..... the U.S. military lost intellectual control over the IP-Net already in the 70's. They were not able to handle it and to foresee the technical possibilities apart from having a net of connected computers. Isn't it?



Without us Europeans, you would still try to send SYN/ACK-Signals and you would not listen to music, watch videos or share text and webpages online.



Overall the "Internet" is a group effort.

[DreamTone7]

Mike - "Overall the "Internet" is a group effort."



Overall, I agree.





But methinks China, Brazil and so forth weren't part of this "group". Me also thinks the europeans need to pony up a lot of funds if they want to have an equal control of the internet...it's like saying, "I helped design it, so it should belong to me now." Doesn't work that way.

Edited by: DreamTone7  at: 11/17/05 17:28

[bitwhys]

funds for what?

[DreamTone7]

We spent millions of dollars on developing and implementing all the networks, the software, the hardware, the staffing, the advertising base that funds a lot of it, etc...and now we're just supposed to hand it over? Methinks not.



If others want control over access within their own countries (and we certainly don't want them controlling access to ours under the circumstances), they're going to have to come up with a net of their own that is somehow linked to ours (and the nets of other countries). The linking will require additonal servers and related software. It's called "startup" money. In addition, much of the advertising that currently funds the net won't buy into the internal net of another country until it's proven that there is a strong base for their advertising. Based on that, some countries may not even be able to fund their own internal net. So, they'd better expect to poney up a pretty penny when all is said and done.



Methinks, all in all, it's a big mistake to do this. The US has always been open with the net. I'm fairly certain some countries will not be as open with their internal nets. The information flow will certainly suffer..."spam" will take on a whole new meaning in some countries. Government spam. Control by the US (or any central control, for that matter) makes it difficult to do this.



If we could form a central global net organization of some sort it would be better. But this can't work unless there exists trust among participating countries. It is exactly the absence of this necessary trust that has brought about the whining. With the amount of integrity the UN has shown of late, simply turning it all over to them would be a serious mistake.

[bitwhys]

hand over the internet. that's rich. do you even know what a root server is?



no cut and paste now. believe me. I'll know.

[DreamTone7]

It's the hardware where the software is that controls the network...think "a big computer".

Melody and Instruments for the soul...

[bitwhys]

heh



this is going to fun. you really don't have any clue.



how exactly does it "control the internet"? what EXACTLY is it controlling?

[DreamTone7]

A lot of things...it's where the host software resides. But as for this thread, he who controls the root server (has access to it and the appropriate access required to get into it) controls the access of others to use the server.

Melody and Instruments for the soul...

[bitwhys]

Quote:

---

A lot of things...it's where the host software resides.

---

LOL



think about it for a second. I'm obviously stapled to a computer all day.



try again. what does "the host software" do?