The Internet Governance Project releases publications regularly. Available on this page are policy analysis, concept papers, comments filed, testimony, book reviews, seminar reports, and project reports. All publications require Adobe Acrobat Reader to view.
2008
7.2008 Scarcity in IP addresses: IPv4 Address Transfer Markets and the Regional Internet Address Registries
[Abstract] [PDF]
Drafter: Milton Mueller
We are running out of Internet addresses. This paper evaluates address transfer policies that Internet governance agencies are considering as a response to the depletion of the IPv4 address space. The paper focuses on proposals to allow organizations holding IPv4 addresses to sell address blocks to other organizations willing to buy them. This paper analyzes the economics of the proposed transfer policies, and conducts a systematic comparison of the policies proposed in the three main world Internet regions.
Suggested citation: Scarcity in IP addresses: IPv4 Address Transfer Markets and the Regional Internet Address Registries (July 20, 2008). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP08-002. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/IPAddress_TransferMarkets.pdf
We are running out of Internet addresses. This paper evaluates address transfer policies that Internet governance agencies are considering as a response to the depletion of the IPv4 address space. The paper focuses on proposals to allow organizations holding IPv4 addresses to sell address blocks to other organizations willing to buy them. This paper analyzes the economics of the proposed transfer policies, and conducts a systematic comparison of the policies proposed in the three main world Internet regions.
Suggested citation: Scarcity in IP addresses: IPv4 Address Transfer Markets and the Regional Internet Address Registries (July 20, 2008). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP08-002. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/IPAddress_TransferMarkets.pdf
2.2008 Comments of the Internet Governance Project: (Docket No. 071023616-7617-01) The Continued Transition of the Technical Coordination and Management of the Internet's Domain Name and Addressing System: Midterm Review of the Joint Project Agreement
[Abstract] [PDF]
Suggested citation: Comments of the Internet Governance Project: (Docket No. 071023616-7617-01) The Continued Transition of the Technical Coordination and Management of the Internet's Domain Name and Addressing System: Midterm Review of the Joint Project Agreement (February 15, 2008). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP08-001. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/IGP-JPA-08-comments.pdf
2007
11.2007 Net Neutrality as Global Principle for Internet Governance [Abstract] [PDF]
Drafters: Milton Mueller
Concurring: Derrick Cogburn, John Mathiason, Jeanette Hofmann
As a contribution to the 2007 UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF), IGP has released a new paper showing how network neutrality can serve as a globally applicable principle that can guide Internet governance. The paper defines network neutrality as the right of Internet users to access content, services and applications on the Internet without interference from network operators or overbearing governments. It also encompasses the right of network operators to be reasonably free of liability for transmitting content and applications deemed illegal or undesirable by third parties. Those aspects of net neutrality are relevant in a growing number of countries and situations, as both public and private actors attempt to subject the Internet to more control. An important part of the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum is to develop globally applicable public policy principles for Internet governance. The paper contends that the principle of network neutrality combines and integrates concepts of universal access to the resources connected to the Internet, freedom of expression, economic innovation, and free trade in digital products and services.
Suggested citation: Milton Mueller, "Net Neutrality as Global Principle for Internet Governance" (Nov 5, 2007). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP07-003. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/NetNeutralityGlobalPrinciple.pdf
Concurring: Derrick Cogburn, John Mathiason, Jeanette Hofmann
As a contribution to the 2007 UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF), IGP has released a new paper showing how network neutrality can serve as a globally applicable principle that can guide Internet governance. The paper defines network neutrality as the right of Internet users to access content, services and applications on the Internet without interference from network operators or overbearing governments. It also encompasses the right of network operators to be reasonably free of liability for transmitting content and applications deemed illegal or undesirable by third parties. Those aspects of net neutrality are relevant in a growing number of countries and situations, as both public and private actors attempt to subject the Internet to more control. An important part of the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum is to develop globally applicable public policy principles for Internet governance. The paper contends that the principle of network neutrality combines and integrates concepts of universal access to the resources connected to the Internet, freedom of expression, economic innovation, and free trade in digital products and services.
Suggested citation: Milton Mueller, "Net Neutrality as Global Principle for Internet Governance" (Nov 5, 2007). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP07-003. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/NetNeutralityGlobalPrinciple.pdf
05.2007 Securing The Root: A Proposal For Distributing Signing Authority [Abstract] [PDF]
Drafters: Brenden Kuerbis, Milton Mueller
Management of the Domain Name System (DNS) root zone file is a uniquely global policy problem. For the Internet to connect everyone, the root must be coordinated and compatible. While authority over the legacy root zone file has been contentious and divisive at times, everyone agrees that the Internet should be made more secure. A newly standardized protocol, DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC), would make the Internet's infrastructure more secure. In order to fully implement DNSSEC, the procedures for managing the DNS root must be revised. Therein lies an opportunity. In revising the root zone management procedures, we can develop a new solution that diminishes the impact of the legacy monopoly held by the U.S. government and avoids another contentious debate over unilateral U.S. control. In this paper we describe the outlines of a new system for the management of a DNSSEC-enabled root. Our proposal distributes authority over securing the root, unlike another recently suggested method, while avoiding the risks and pitfalls of an intergovernmental power sharing scheme.
Suggested citation: Brenden Kuerbis and Milton Mueller, "Securing The Root: A Proposal For Distributing Signing Authority" (May 17, 2007). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP07-002. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/SecuringTheRoot.pdf
Management of the Domain Name System (DNS) root zone file is a uniquely global policy problem. For the Internet to connect everyone, the root must be coordinated and compatible. While authority over the legacy root zone file has been contentious and divisive at times, everyone agrees that the Internet should be made more secure. A newly standardized protocol, DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC), would make the Internet's infrastructure more secure. In order to fully implement DNSSEC, the procedures for managing the DNS root must be revised. Therein lies an opportunity. In revising the root zone management procedures, we can develop a new solution that diminishes the impact of the legacy monopoly held by the U.S. government and avoids another contentious debate over unilateral U.S. control. In this paper we describe the outlines of a new system for the management of a DNSSEC-enabled root. Our proposal distributes authority over securing the root, unlike another recently suggested method, while avoiding the risks and pitfalls of an intergovernmental power sharing scheme.
Suggested citation: Brenden Kuerbis and Milton Mueller, "Securing The Root: A Proposal For Distributing Signing Authority" (May 17, 2007). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP07-002. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/SecuringTheRoot.pdf
01.2007 Triple X, Internet Content Regulation and the ICANN Regime [Abstract] [PDF]
Drafter: Milton Mueller
Concurring: John Mathiason, Jeanette Hofmann, Lee McKnight, Derrick Cogburn, Hans Klein
The backers of the controversial .xxx domain have negotiated a new contract with ICANN. Although final approval of the contract is still vehemently opposed by an amusing alliance of anti-pornography conservatives and pornographers with investments in existing adult domain names, chances are now good that it will finally succeed in gaining the approval of the ICANN Board.
What are the implications of this probable resolution of the .xxx drama for the Internet and Internet governance? They are major. But no one seems to be talking about them.
Suggested citation: Milton Mueller, "Triple X, Internet Content Regulation and the ICANN Regime" (January 14, 2007). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP07-001. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/new-xxx-contract.pdf
Concurring: John Mathiason, Jeanette Hofmann, Lee McKnight, Derrick Cogburn, Hans Klein
The backers of the controversial .xxx domain have negotiated a new contract with ICANN. Although final approval of the contract is still vehemently opposed by an amusing alliance of anti-pornography conservatives and pornographers with investments in existing adult domain names, chances are now good that it will finally succeed in gaining the approval of the ICANN Board.
What are the implications of this probable resolution of the .xxx drama for the Internet and Internet governance? They are major. But no one seems to be talking about them.
Suggested citation: Milton Mueller, "Triple X, Internet Content Regulation and the ICANN Regime" (January 14, 2007). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP07-001. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/new-xxx-contract.pdf
2006
10.2006 The Road to Rio: Results-based Management of the UN Internet Governance Forum [Abstract] [PDF]
Drafters: John Mathiason
Concurring: Milton Mueller, Jeanette Hofmann, Lee McKnight, Derrick Cogburn
Over a thousand people are heading to Athens, Greece for the first meeting of the UN-sponsored Internet Governance Forum. Many of them are still fielding doubts or worries about what the outcome of this new multi-stakeholder institution is supposed to be.
In a new paper from the Internet Governance Project, John Mathiason opens with the famous quote from Yogi Berra, "if you don't know where you are going, you might not get there." He proposes some specific outcomes for the Forum that are consistent with the Tunis Agenda and proposes to use the techniques of "results based management" to assess how well the Forum achieves them.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason, "The Road to Rio: Results-based Management of the UN Internet Governance Forum" (October 23, 2006). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP06-006. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/roadtorio.pdf
Concurring: Milton Mueller, Jeanette Hofmann, Lee McKnight, Derrick Cogburn
Over a thousand people are heading to Athens, Greece for the first meeting of the UN-sponsored Internet Governance Forum. Many of them are still fielding doubts or worries about what the outcome of this new multi-stakeholder institution is supposed to be.
In a new paper from the Internet Governance Project, John Mathiason opens with the famous quote from Yogi Berra, "if you don't know where you are going, you might not get there." He proposes some specific outcomes for the Forum that are consistent with the Tunis Agenda and proposes to use the techniques of "results based management" to assess how well the Forum achieves them.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason, "The Road to Rio: Results-based Management of the UN Internet Governance Forum" (October 23, 2006). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP06-006. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/roadtorio.pdf
7.2006 Comments of the Internet Governance Project: (Docket No. 060519136-6136-01) The Continued Transition of the Technical Coordination and Management of the Internet Domain Name and Addressing System
[Abstract] [PDF]
Internet Governance Project
The essence of our comments can be summarized as follows: The transition of DNS administration envisioned by the White Paper has gotten stuck somewhere in the middle of the process. This halfway house is an unstable and undesirable place. We urge the U.S. Commerce Department to complete the transition of DNS to a nongovernmental, multistakeholder regime and to clarify and limit the role of national governments, including the U.S. government. To pave the way for the transition, we ask the U.S. to ameliorate and internationalize its oversight in ways that will strengthen the accountability of ICANN to the global Internet community. We ask that two new principles related to accountability be explicitly recognized as part of ICANN's charter. One pertains to the basic human right of freedom of expression; the other would be a general principle of accountability.
Suggested citation: Comments of the Internet Governance Project: (Docket No. 060519136-6136-01) The Continued Transition of the Technical Coordination and Management of the Internet Domain Name and Addressing System (July 7, 2006). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP06-005. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/NTIAcomments-IGP-FINAL.pdf
The essence of our comments can be summarized as follows: The transition of DNS administration envisioned by the White Paper has gotten stuck somewhere in the middle of the process. This halfway house is an unstable and undesirable place. We urge the U.S. Commerce Department to complete the transition of DNS to a nongovernmental, multistakeholder regime and to clarify and limit the role of national governments, including the U.S. government. To pave the way for the transition, we ask the U.S. to ameliorate and internationalize its oversight in ways that will strengthen the accountability of ICANN to the global Internet community. We ask that two new principles related to accountability be explicitly recognized as part of ICANN's charter. One pertains to the basic human right of freedom of expression; the other would be a general principle of accountability.
Suggested citation: Comments of the Internet Governance Project: (Docket No. 060519136-6136-01) The Continued Transition of the Technical Coordination and Management of the Internet Domain Name and Addressing System (July 7, 2006). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP06-005. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/NTIAcomments-IGP-FINAL.pdf
6.2006 Internet Governance Wars, Episode II: the Realists Strike Back: A review of Goldsmith and Wu's "Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World"
[Abstract] [PDF]
Author: John Mathiason
John Mathiason examines the international relations theory underlying the book and likens it to Episode 2 of Star Wars: "The Realists Strike Back."
Suggested citation: John Mathiason, "Internet Governance Wars, Episode II: the Realists Strike Back: A review of Goldsmith and Wu's 'Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World'" (June, 2006). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP06-004. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/JM-IGWars.pdf
John Mathiason examines the international relations theory underlying the book and likens it to Episode 2 of Star Wars: "The Realists Strike Back."
Suggested citation: John Mathiason, "Internet Governance Wars, Episode II: the Realists Strike Back: A review of Goldsmith and Wu's 'Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World'" (June, 2006). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP06-004. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/JM-IGWars.pdf
6.2006 The New Cyber-Conservatism: Goldsmith/Wu and the Premature Triumphalism of the Territorial Nation-State: A review of Goldsmith and Wu's "Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World"
[Abstract] [PDF]
Author: Milton Mueller
Milton Mueller assails the "premature triumphalism of the territorial nation state" evident in the book and claims, "If the internet was a revolutionary force...this book risks being a manifesto for counterrevolution."
Suggested citation: Milton Mueller, "The New Cyber-Conservatism: Goldsmith/Wu and the Premature Triumphalism of the Territorial Nation-State: A review of Goldsmith and Wu's 'Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World'" (June, 2006). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP06-003. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/MM-goldsmithWu.pdf
Milton Mueller assails the "premature triumphalism of the territorial nation state" evident in the book and claims, "If the internet was a revolutionary force...this book risks being a manifesto for counterrevolution."
Suggested citation: Milton Mueller, "The New Cyber-Conservatism: Goldsmith/Wu and the Premature Triumphalism of the Territorial Nation-State: A review of Goldsmith and Wu's 'Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World'" (June, 2006). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP06-003. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/MM-goldsmithWu.pdf
5.2006 The Distributed Secretariat: Making the Internet Governance Forum Work
[Abstract] [PDF]
Author: John Mathiason
International policy discussions are heavily dependent on the substantive preparatory activities of a Secretariat. IGP has prepared a paper outlining a new way for the Internet Governance Forum to meet the need for a substantive Secretariat. It proposes to create a "distributed Secretariat" wherein the Forum delegates to qualified groups the responsibility for preparing the factual and normative analysis that can serve as the starting point for its public deliberations.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason, "The Distributed Secretariat: Making the Internet Governance Forum Work" (May 17, 2006). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP06-002. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/distrib-sec.pdf
International policy discussions are heavily dependent on the substantive preparatory activities of a Secretariat. IGP has prepared a paper outlining a new way for the Internet Governance Forum to meet the need for a substantive Secretariat. It proposes to create a "distributed Secretariat" wherein the Forum delegates to qualified groups the responsibility for preparing the factual and normative analysis that can serve as the starting point for its public deliberations.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason, "The Distributed Secretariat: Making the Internet Governance Forum Work" (May 17, 2006). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP06-002. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/distrib-sec.pdf
2.2006 Building an "Internet Governance Forum"
[Abstract] [PDF]
Drafters: Milton Mueller, John Mathiason
Signatories: Jeanette Hofmann, Lee McKnight, Derrick Cogburn, Hans Klein
The United Nations is building a new platform for the discussion of global Internet policy. Public consultations on this new "Internet Governance Forum" will be held in Geneva February 16-17. IGP has released a new discussion paper explaining how the Forum could work. The paper proposes three design criteria for the Forum: 1) It must be as open as possible and give all stakeholders equal participation rights; 2) its deliberations must be wide-ranging and resist politically motivated barriers to discussion; and 3) its products must feed into other, more authoritative Internet governance forums. We proposed a structure and process for the realization of these objectives. We also set out three policy problems that exemplify the kind of issues the Forum should take up: spam, Internet free expression, and public policy principles for the coordination of Internet resources.
Suggested citation: Milton Mueller and John Mathiason, "Building an Internet Governance Forum" (February 3, 2006). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP06-001. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-forum.pdf
Signatories: Jeanette Hofmann, Lee McKnight, Derrick Cogburn, Hans Klein
The United Nations is building a new platform for the discussion of global Internet policy. Public consultations on this new "Internet Governance Forum" will be held in Geneva February 16-17. IGP has released a new discussion paper explaining how the Forum could work. The paper proposes three design criteria for the Forum: 1) It must be as open as possible and give all stakeholders equal participation rights; 2) its deliberations must be wide-ranging and resist politically motivated barriers to discussion; and 3) its products must feed into other, more authoritative Internet governance forums. We proposed a structure and process for the realization of these objectives. We also set out three policy problems that exemplify the kind of issues the Forum should take up: spam, Internet free expression, and public policy principles for the coordination of Internet resources.
Suggested citation: Milton Mueller and John Mathiason, "Building an Internet Governance Forum" (February 3, 2006). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP06-001. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-forum.pdf
2005
11.2005 ICANN Reform: Establishing the Rule of Law
[Abstract] [PDF]
Author: Hans Klein
Debates over Internet governance can be clarified by the recognition that ICANN is a regulatory agency. Its responsibilities for setting base prices, protecting trademarks, and controlling market entry are typical of a regulatory agency. Principles for good governance of regulatory agencies exist and should be applied to ICANN. These emphasize the rule of law, i.e. reliance on rules to limit power politics. ICANN's history shows how private governance can be captured by powerful players. At WSIS governments need to create and enforce a legally-defined framework that limits the power of all stakeholders -- including governments themselves. By establishing the rule of law, the politicized processes of ICANN can be replaced by predictable, fair, and efficient decision-making.
Suggested citation: Hans Klein, "ICANN Reform: Establishing the Rule of Law" (November 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-010. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/ICANN-Reform-Establishing-the-Rule-of-Law.pdf
Debates over Internet governance can be clarified by the recognition that ICANN is a regulatory agency. Its responsibilities for setting base prices, protecting trademarks, and controlling market entry are typical of a regulatory agency. Principles for good governance of regulatory agencies exist and should be applied to ICANN. These emphasize the rule of law, i.e. reliance on rules to limit power politics. ICANN's history shows how private governance can be captured by powerful players. At WSIS governments need to create and enforce a legally-defined framework that limits the power of all stakeholders -- including governments themselves. By establishing the rule of law, the politicized processes of ICANN can be replaced by predictable, fair, and efficient decision-making.
Suggested citation: Hans Klein, "ICANN Reform: Establishing the Rule of Law" (November 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-010. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/ICANN-Reform-Establishing-the-Rule-of-Law.pdf
11.2005 Political Oversight of ICANN: A Briefing for the WSIS Summit
[Abstract] [PDF]
The Internet Governance Project
WSIS seems to be foundering on the issue of "political oversight" of the Internet. IGP issues a new paper that clarifies the issues and provides concrete proposals for moving forward. We explain why WSIS must separate discussion of the role of governments in setting policy for all Internet issues from discussion of the narrower problem of ICANN's oversight. By means of a careful analysis of the contractual instruments used by the U.S. government to supervise ICANN, the paper shows how the problem of U.S. unilateral oversight can be addressed in a way that is both politically feasible and avoids threatening the stability or freedom of the Internet.
Suggested citation: Internet Governance Project, "Political Oversight of ICANN: A Briefing for the WSIS Summit" (November 1, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-009. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/political-oversight.pdf
WSIS seems to be foundering on the issue of "political oversight" of the Internet. IGP issues a new paper that clarifies the issues and provides concrete proposals for moving forward. We explain why WSIS must separate discussion of the role of governments in setting policy for all Internet issues from discussion of the narrower problem of ICANN's oversight. By means of a careful analysis of the contractual instruments used by the U.S. government to supervise ICANN, the paper shows how the problem of U.S. unilateral oversight can be addressed in a way that is both politically feasible and avoids threatening the stability or freedom of the Internet.
Suggested citation: Internet Governance Project, "Political Oversight of ICANN: A Briefing for the WSIS Summit" (November 1, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-009. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/political-oversight.pdf
8.2005 WGIG's Multistakeholder Forum: What Will it Take to Make it Work?
[Abstract] [PDF]
Authors: John Mathiason, Derrick Cogburn and Lee McKnight
IGP issues a new analytical paper on the global multistakeholder forum recommended by the Working Group on Internet Governance in its final report. The paper discusses the six factors that need to be taken into account in working out the details of a forum mechanism. The WGIG's proposal for a new global forum will be a matter of negotiation at the Prepcom 3.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason, Derrick Cogburn and Lee McKnight, "WGIG's Multistakeholder Forum: What Will it Take to Make it Work?" (August 29, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-008. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-msforum.pdf
IGP issues a new analytical paper on the global multistakeholder forum recommended by the Working Group on Internet Governance in its final report. The paper discusses the six factors that need to be taken into account in working out the details of a forum mechanism. The WGIG's proposal for a new global forum will be a matter of negotiation at the Prepcom 3.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason, Derrick Cogburn and Lee McKnight, "WGIG's Multistakeholder Forum: What Will it Take to Make it Work?" (August 29, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-008. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-msforum.pdf
7.2005 The Future US Role in Internet Governance: 7 points in response to the US Commerce Department's "Statement of Principles"
[Abstract] [PDF]
The Internet Governance Project
On June 30, 2005, the United States Department of Commerce National Telecommunications and Information Administrtation (NTIA) released the "US Statement of Principles on the Internet's Domain Name and Addressing System." The Internet Governance Project (IGP) has issued the following response to the NTIA's declaration. We applaud the attention Commerce Department officials are giving to this critical issue. The NTIA's declaration is welcome as a formalization of current US policy, in advance of the now-released report of the UN Working Group on Internet Governance. However, the debate has moved on, and so too must US policy. We make 7 points in response to the "Statement of Principles" showing the direction we believe is in the interests of the United States and the world.
Suggested citation: Internet Governance Project, "The Future US Role in Internet Governance: 7 points in response to the US Commerce Department's "Statement of Principles"" (July 28, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-007. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-usrole.pdf
On June 30, 2005, the United States Department of Commerce National Telecommunications and Information Administrtation (NTIA) released the "US Statement of Principles on the Internet's Domain Name and Addressing System." The Internet Governance Project (IGP) has issued the following response to the NTIA's declaration. We applaud the attention Commerce Department officials are giving to this critical issue. The NTIA's declaration is welcome as a formalization of current US policy, in advance of the now-released report of the UN Working Group on Internet Governance. However, the debate has moved on, and so too must US policy. We make 7 points in response to the "Statement of Principles" showing the direction we believe is in the interests of the United States and the world.
Suggested citation: Internet Governance Project, "The Future US Role in Internet Governance: 7 points in response to the US Commerce Department's "Statement of Principles"" (July 28, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-007. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-usrole.pdf
7.2005 Internet Governance Quo Vadis? A Response to the WGIG Report
[Abstract] [PDF]
Authors: John Mathiason and Milton Mueller
The United Nations Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) has issued its report. After more than eight months of work, WGIG reached consensus on only a few key matters. It remains to be seen whether the report will give governmental, private sector and civil society actors the concepts and consensus needed to navigate successfully the negotiating sessions of the World Summit on the Information Society. The question to be asked now is: quo vadis? Where do we go from here? The report succeeded in supplying a consensus definition of Internet governance, one which we found useful. It also succeeded in identifying a range of important public policy issues. On the key problems of defining roles and responsibilities of actors and proposals for action, however, the WGIG Report provides less clear guidance.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason and Milton Mueller, "Internet Governance Quo Vadis? A Response to the WGIG Report" (July 16, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-006. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-quovadis.pdf
The United Nations Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) has issued its report. After more than eight months of work, WGIG reached consensus on only a few key matters. It remains to be seen whether the report will give governmental, private sector and civil society actors the concepts and consensus needed to navigate successfully the negotiating sessions of the World Summit on the Information Society. The question to be asked now is: quo vadis? Where do we go from here? The report succeeded in supplying a consensus definition of Internet governance, one which we found useful. It also succeeded in identifying a range of important public policy issues. On the key problems of defining roles and responsibilities of actors and proposals for action, however, the WGIG Report provides less clear guidance.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason and Milton Mueller, "Internet Governance Quo Vadis? A Response to the WGIG Report" (July 16, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-006. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-quovadis.pdf
7.2005 Competition in IPv6 Addressing: A Review of the Debate
[Abstract] [PDF]
Author: Milton Mueller
IGP releases a new paper discussing proposals for competing sources of IPv6 addresses. IP addressing is one of the most important - yet least understood - aspects of Internet governance. The new IGP paper reviews the debate on IP addressing and concludes that "there is room for significant policy variation in address space management. Introduction of a responsible, globalized competing IPv6 allocation authority below the top level would permit experimentation with different policies and governance systems. This might make addressing more responsive to the needs of users."
Suggested citation: Milton Mueller, "Competition in IPv6 Addressing: A Review of the Debate" (July 5, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-005. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-v6.pdf
IGP releases a new paper discussing proposals for competing sources of IPv6 addresses. IP addressing is one of the most important - yet least understood - aspects of Internet governance. The new IGP paper reviews the debate on IP addressing and concludes that "there is room for significant policy variation in address space management. Introduction of a responsible, globalized competing IPv6 allocation authority below the top level would permit experimentation with different policies and governance systems. This might make addressing more responsive to the needs of users."
Suggested citation: Milton Mueller, "Competition in IPv6 Addressing: A Review of the Debate" (July 5, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-005. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-v6.pdf
4.2005 What to Do About ICANN: A Proposal for Structural Reform
[Abstract] [PDF]
Authors: Hans Klein and Milton Mueller
Controversies over ICANN led to the creation of the Working Group on Internet Governance, but so far there have been few specific proposals for change. The Internet Governance Project announces a new policy paper: "What to Do About ICANN: A Proposal for Structural Reform." The proposal, by Hans Klein and Milton Mueller, addresses the criticisms that have been made of ICANN, including unilateral U.S. oversight, the exercise of governmental powers without corresponding mechanisms for accountability, and a lack of legitimacy. Three structural reforms are proposed: 1) Create an international oversight body to replace US oversight of ICANN and ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee; 2) restore ICANN's global Board elections; 3) Give ccTLD managers and Internet Protocol address users a choice of governance arrangements by sharing responsibility for the Internet root zone between ICANN and the ITU.
Suggested citation: Hans Klein and Milton Mueller, "What to Do About ICANN: A Proposal for Structural Reform" (April 5, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-002. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-icannreform.pdf
Controversies over ICANN led to the creation of the Working Group on Internet Governance, but so far there have been few specific proposals for change. The Internet Governance Project announces a new policy paper: "What to Do About ICANN: A Proposal for Structural Reform." The proposal, by Hans Klein and Milton Mueller, addresses the criticisms that have been made of ICANN, including unilateral U.S. oversight, the exercise of governmental powers without corresponding mechanisms for accountability, and a lack of legitimacy. Three structural reforms are proposed: 1) Create an international oversight body to replace US oversight of ICANN and ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee; 2) restore ICANN's global Board elections; 3) Give ccTLD managers and Internet Protocol address users a choice of governance arrangements by sharing responsibility for the Internet root zone between ICANN and the ITU.
Suggested citation: Hans Klein and Milton Mueller, "What to Do About ICANN: A Proposal for Structural Reform" (April 5, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-002. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-icannreform.pdf
2.2005 A Global Alliance for ICT: Bringing Policy Making to the Public and the Public to Policy Making
[Abstract] [PDF]
Authors: John Mathiason and Derrick Cogburn
The Project releases a new paper calling for the use of Internet-based collaboration technologies and a Global Alliance as a new institutional framework for multistakeholder policy development in communication and information policy. The paper, by IGP partners John Mathiason and Derrick Cogburn, views a Global Alliance as a successor to the role filled by the UN ICT Task Force, which is due to cease existence at the end of 2005.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason and Derrick Cogburn, "A Global Alliance for ICT: Bringing Policy Making to the Public and the Public to Policy Making" (February 8, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-001. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-ga.pdf
The Project releases a new paper calling for the use of Internet-based collaboration technologies and a Global Alliance as a new institutional framework for multistakeholder policy development in communication and information policy. The paper, by IGP partners John Mathiason and Derrick Cogburn, views a Global Alliance as a successor to the role filled by the UN ICT Task Force, which is due to cease existence at the end of 2005.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason and Derrick Cogburn, "A Global Alliance for ICT: Bringing Policy Making to the Public and the Public to Policy Making" (February 8, 2005). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP05-001. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-ga.pdf
2004
12.2004 A Framework Convention: An Institutional Option for Internet Governance
[Abstract] [PDF]
Author: John Mathiason
The Project releases one of our most significant WSIS contributions: a document calling for an international framework convention on the Internet. The paper, by John Mathiason, compares today's situation to the controversies over climate change in the 1980s. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, rather than seeking to solve all of the problems in a single treaty, pursued a "framework convention," which first established the principles and norms under which international action would proceed. It also set up a procedure for future negotiations over more detailed arrangements. We suggest a similar approach for Internet governance.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason, "A Framework Convention: An Institutional Option for Internet Governance" (December 21, 2004). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP04-002. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-fc.pdf
The Project releases one of our most significant WSIS contributions: a document calling for an international framework convention on the Internet. The paper, by John Mathiason, compares today's situation to the controversies over climate change in the 1980s. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, rather than seeking to solve all of the problems in a single treaty, pursued a "framework convention," which first established the principles and norms under which international action would proceed. It also set up a procedure for future negotiations over more detailed arrangements. We suggest a similar approach for Internet governance.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason, "A Framework Convention: An Institutional Option for Internet Governance" (December 21, 2004). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP04-002. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/igp-fc.pdf
9.2004 Internet Governance: the State of Play
[Abstract] [PDF]
Author: John Mathiason, Milton Mueller, Hans Klein and Marc Holitscher
A comprehensive overview of Internet governance regimes, organizations, issues.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason, Milton Mueller, Hans Klein and Marc Holitscher, "Internet Governance: the State of Play" (September 9, 2004). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP04-001. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/mainreport-final.pdf
A comprehensive overview of Internet governance regimes, organizations, issues.
Suggested citation: John Mathiason, Milton Mueller, Hans Klein and Marc Holitscher, "Internet Governance: the State of Play" (September 9, 2004). Internet Governance Project. Paper IGP04-001. Available at http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/mainreport-final.pdf
