Domain Debaters Are Given Deadline Warning

Welcome Guest. | Log In| Register | Membership Benefits

July 24, 1998 (10:58 AM EDT)

By Andrew Craig,

GENEVA -- President Clinton's Internet adviser issued a stern warning to Internet-community members Friday to reach a consensus about the future of Internet-address management, or risk losing control of the process.

Ira Magaziner, senior adviser to the president for policy development, told attendees at the International Forum on the White Paper conference here in Geneva to put aside their differences and find consensus on plans to establish a new nonprofit organization to run the domain-name system, before the Sept. 30 deadline set by the U.S. government.

Internet-community members are gathered at the conference for the second of three meetings to find consensus on the issues raised in the U.S. government's proposals for the future of domain-name management.

Magaziner said he would leave the building straight after his speech, reflecting the U.S. government's stand-off role in developing the specific details of the new procedures.

"We won't accept two different proposals," Magaziner said, emphasizing the Sept. 30 deadline. If you do [submit two proposals], I will just send you back and lock you in a room until you do find consensus. You've got to come out with one opinion," he said.

But while attendees at the conference said the deadline was tight, they said they were confident they'd reach a consensus by the end of the session, which runs through Saturday.

"It is a very tight target, but I think it's possible," said Keith Gymer, an Internet adviser at British Telecommunications.

President of the European ISP Association, Jim Dixon said he agreed a consensus could be reached, but "it will depend on good will."

Dixon said there was good will at the first of the three meetings, in Reston, Va. Many well-known industry people with differing opinions weren't in Reston, but they're in Geneva, he said.

Those people with differing opinions must compromise for the sake of the process, said John Wood, director of Internet consultancy LLC and a member of the forum's steering committee. "We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that we have a Sept. 30 deadline," he said.

It is also important that the largely private sector-based forum is seen to be an effective vehicle for making decisions about the Internet, according to Wood. "We shouldn't underestimate that if the private sector can't agree on this, how will they manage in wider areas of e-commerce?" he said.

Magaziner said some in the U.S. government, who would prefer to continue governing the Internet, are watching and waiting for self-governance to fail.

"What I don't want is for us to be sitting here three to four months from now all squabbling," he said. Other government forces "will see that self-governance is not working and think governments must step in," said Magaziner.

One of the first workshops reached immediate consensus on the role of the new nonprofit organization. Members reached a consensus that the new body should control assignment of technical parameters of Internet-addressing, and should assure the stability of the Internet.

International issues, however, were the subject of most of the debate in the early sessions. People from all over the world attended the event. But consensus couldn't be reached on whether the organization -- to be based in the United States -- could be free to move location in the future, or on issues relating to the management of country-specific domain names, such as .uk or .ca.

The U.S. government surrendered its control of domain-name management last year and proposed the establishment of a new nonprofit organization to take over the management role this September in its domain-name white paper published in June.