Tracking where the fallout will be in the wake of NTIA’s announcement
NTIA couldn’t have timed their big news announcement about IANA better if they’d tried.
People had just received their NETmundial confirmations (or not). Those who’d decided that NETmundial was probably going to be a waste of time were suddenly kicking themselves for not applying.
Those who decided not to include material about IANA in their NETmundial submissions were kicking themselves for not mentioning it.
Those who had included IANA-related material were kicking themselves that they hadn’t included more concrete details.
Every organization that considered itself an important part of the Internet governance ecosystem rushed to get out their own official statement reflecting on the news.
Nobody had a relaxing weekend.
But this is only the start. Despite the NTIA’s insistence that it won’t release IANA out into the world unless it’s sure it can be free of oversight by any single government or an intergovernmental mechanism, this isn’t going to stop some governments and likeminded stakeholders from arguing that an intergovernmental framework is what really needs to happen.
We already had a busy Internet governance year lined up. All those Internet-governance related events on the calendar are now likely to have some IANA-related content included or contain some IANA-related fallout of some description.
If you have long thought that the Internet governance world largely consists of the same people travelling around the world to discuss the same issues in what could really be the same set of gloomy conference rooms, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Below is my initial analysis of where I think we will probably see IANA-related discussions. I also suspect that the same debates will play out in many of the venues.
Where IANA-related effects may be seen in the 2014 Internet governance calendar
These aren’t in date order:
1. ICANN meetings, 23-28 March, 22-26 June, and 12-16 October
2. Informal consultations on the overall review of the WSIS, ending 30 March
Some States want there to be a repeat of the whole World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) process from 2003-2005, including preparatory meetings. The fact some governments now may perceive it to be a realistic option that IANA can finally have overview by all 193 States, equally, may give them added impetus to support a full review and rewrite of key WSIS outcomes, including the Tunis Agenda. Such a rewrite, they may hope, could include more concrete text on the way forward for IANA.
3. NETmundial, 23-24 April
There are 62 submissions containing proposals related to IANA and ICANN governance mechanisms. If the NTIA announcement had happened earlier, we would have had double that number. NETmundial submissions don’t come from many of the governments most critical of the current ICANN and IANA oversight mechanisms. It’s unlikely that such governments will want to submit submissions now, as they generally would have issues with the pro-multistakeholder focus of the meeting. Those who have already submitted contributions, however, may want to amend their documents to include more concrete material on IANA’s future. It’s not clear how NETmundial organizers plan to handle this. Whether or not updated proposals are accepted, however, in reality, when we’re all onsite in Sao Paolo, the late night drafting groups that are likely to be convened to develop the final outcome documents will probably be informal ways to inject new IANA-related material into the mix.
4. ITU World Telecommunications Development Conference (WTDC-14), 30 March – 10 April
This meeting is before NETmundial, so it will be interesting what the wider selection of developing countries that aren’t engaging in NETmundial will have to say. Here, we could see a “think of the developing countries” slant on the path forward for IANA. I doubt it would be a significant component of the meeting, but there could be some language inserted into a resolution or two. Possible existing resolutions that might be appropriate venues for this are:
- Resolution 20: Non-discriminatory access to modern telecommunication/information and communication technology facilities, services and related applications.
- Resolution 45 (Rev. Hyderabad, 2010): Mechanisms for enhancing cooperation on cybersecurity, including countering and combating spam. This one’s a long shot, but given in the past some States have used cybersecurity-related concerns to support proposals related to greater involvement of governments in Internet governance, it may happen here, too. I doubt such proposals would make it into the final resolution, though.
- Resolution 63: IP address allocation and encouraging the deployment of IPv6 in the developing countries. IP addressing and IANA: it’s a match made in heaven.
5. WSIS+10 High Level Event, 10-13 June
Discussions on ICANN-related issues were deferred at the last preparatory meeting in February. They are meant to be discussed at the upcoming preparatory meeting in April. No doubt, this will include a very large portion of IANA-related debates. There is also a final preparatory meeting in May, where the discussions could continue. The texts that the High Level Event will produce are:
- WSIS+10 Statement on the Implementation of WSIS Outcomes
- WSIS+10 Vision for WSIS Beyond 2015
The most recent versions of these documents are available here. It is conceivable that there will be some parties wishing to add explicit mention of IANA in the WSIS+10 Vision document.
6. The additional CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation (WGEC) meeting, 30 April – 2 May
The IANA is one of the holy grails for governments wanting a greater and equal-between-governments role in the decision-making processes of Internet governance. WGEC’s final meeting was supposed to be in February, but it was unable to find consensus on the intractable issue of enhanced cooperation. The discussions at the extra April/May meeting added to try and finalize the WG’s work is likely to be further enlivened by some WG members’ desire to inject specific IANA-related recommendations. This could mean that the WG finds itself unable to reach consensus, again, and it needs to go back to CSTD and ask them to decide whether an extension of the WG’s mandate is needed.
7. 17th Session of the CSTD, 12-16 May and ECOSOC, 23 June – 18 July
The CSTD session could be in for a bumpy ride. This is because it is at the centre of a perfect storm:
- CSTD is the focal point in the system-wide follow-up review and assessment of progress made in implementing the outcomes of WSIS.
- The Tunis Agenda enhanced cooperation text about governments participating on an equal footing can be read as diplomatic speak for “all governments to oversee IANA – not just the USA”.
- The 2014 CSTD session is a key point in the lead-up to the UN-wide overall review of the WSIS process in 2015, writing the draft ECOSOC resolution on WSIS.
The drafting group working on the draft WSIS resolution may, once again, end up finishing their work early on the Saturday morning, well after the CSTD Session has officially ended. ECOSOC is unlikely to care that much about IANA, but if the CSTD debate is inconclusive, it could spill into its space as well.
8. ITU Plenipotentiary Conference 2014 (PP-14), 20 October – 7 November
So many Internet-related proposals, so many opportunities to include text about IANA:
- Resolution 101: Internet Protocol-based networks
- Resolution 102: ITU’s role with regard to international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet and the management of Internet resources, including domain names and addresses
- Resolution 133: Role of administrations of Member States in the management of internationalized (multilingual) domain names
- Resolution 178: ITU role in organizing the work on technical aspects of telecommunication networks to support the Internet
- Resolution 180: Facilitating the transition from IPv4 to IPv6
9. IGF, 2-5 September, and regional and national IGFs
Many, many opportunities to discuss IANA. More reasons for people to want IGFs to produce more concrete outcomes. Expect many IANA-related workshops to be submitted in response to the recent call for workshop proposals.
What does this all mean?
I suspect that the large number of venues discussing what to do with IANA and the even larger number of stakeholders who will want a say in how IANA goes forward will mean it’s nowhere near realistic to think that a solution can be reached in time for the September 2015 of the current IANA contract with the US government. I think it is probably more realistic to see the current IANA contract being renewed, with the timeline for IANA’s future taking at least two years or more.
If you think I’m being overly pessimistic, consider the new gLTD policy development process, which is another significant process in the ICANN space. The policy development process was begun in 2005, and it’s only this year that the resulting new gTLDs are actually being deployed.
A long timeline isn’t a bad thing, however. While it is plainly clear that the IANA needs to transition out of US government oversight, it is better to take the transition process slowly, and get it right in the long-term, than to rush into it and end up with a different but still problematic management of IANA.
The important thing is to make sure all stakeholders are involved in ernest and that we don’t end up developing a solution by merely letting the usual globe-trotting participants out-talk less resourced stakeholders with equally legimate views on the way forward.