European Domain-Name Meeting Draws Blank

Welcome Guest. | Log In| Register | Membership Benefits

July 08, 1998 (4:43 AM EDT)

By Matthew Slater,

BRUSSELS, Belgium -- Senior representatives from the European Internet community met here in Brussels Tuesday, but were unable to reach any consensus on a European response to the U.S. proposals for the future management and allocation of Internet domain names.

Although the conference was able to produce some basic agreements on the need for a new system and for European involvement in the restructuring process, serious divisions remained. No progress at all was made on the fundamental issue of European representation on the new body that will assume the management of the Internet-naming and -addressing system later this year.

"We have failed in the one thing we were supposed to talk about -- who is actually going to sit on the new domain-name board. Are we not an appropriate body to suggest some names, or are we going to let the U.S. decide everything?" said Siegfried Langenbach, senior executive at the German Network Information Centre.

The debate on Internet domain names was initiated in January this year by a U.S. administration green paper on the future governance of the Internet. This document was widely condemned as being too "U.S.-centric," but last month's white paper, the revised version of the green paper, was broadly welcomed as being more representative of the network's global reach and appeal.

The main aspect of the U.S. plan is for a new, nonprofit, but industry-led, organization to replace the existing bodies -- the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) and Network Solutions Inc. (NSI), which grew out of the Internet's beginnings in U.S. universities.

The U.S. government contracts with IANA and NSI, which respectively manage the numerical addresses that lie behind domain names, and the generic top-level domains (gTLDs), such as .com and .org, will expire at the end of September.

Earlier in the conference, Brian Carpenter, chairman of the Internet Architecture Board, said it was essential that the debate moved forward quickly, so a "high calibre, internationally respected" committee can be established before October.

"I have just been speaking to Jon Postel, [head of] IANA, about this," said Carpenter. "We both think the next body should build on the existing structure. Jon is too modest about this, because I think it is inconceivable to go on without IANA's expertise. Make no mistake -- we need those guys."

Despite total agreement that Europe should also contribute to the new body, the conference became bogged down on questions related to the authority of the interim committee that will replace IANA and NSI in October.

Many speakers said the committee should limit itself to the task of electing a new, more permanent committee, but others warned against any further delays in reforming the management of the Internet and called for immediate action, including the introduction of new gTLDs.

Speaking at the end of the conference, the European Commission's Internet expert, Christopher Wilkinson, said a "panel of participants" would be set up to coordinate the European contribution to the international debate on the future governance of the Internet.

The panel will meet its U.S. and Asian counterparts during the coming weeks, and will also fully participate in the next large-scale opportunity for continuing the debate, the INET '98 conference in Geneva later this month, Wilkinson said.