The Domain Naming System, DNS, is
one of the internet’s most important components.
It pairs the easy-to-remember web
addresses - like bbc.com - with their relevant servers. Without DNS, you’d only
be able to access websites by typing in its IP address, a series of numbers
such as "194.66.82.10".
More by circumstance than
intention, the US has always had ultimate say over how the DNS is controlled -
but not for much longer.
It will give up its power fully
to Icann - the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers - a
non-profit organisation.
The terms of the change were agreed upon in 2014, but it
wasn’t until now that the US said
it was finally satisfied that Icann was ready to make the change.
Icann will get the “keys to the
kingdom”, as one expert put it, on 1st October 2016. From that date, the US
will lose its dominant voice - although Icann will remain in Los Angeles.
If anyone can, Icann?
Users of the web will not notice
any difference - that’s because Icann has essentially being doing the job for
years anyway.
But it’s a move that has been
fiercely criticised by some US politicians as opening the door to the likes of
China and Russia to meddle with a system that has always been “protected” by
the US.
"The proposal will
significantly increase the power of foreign governments over the Internet,”
warned a letter signed by several Republican senators, including former
Presidential hopeful, Ted Cruz.
Whether you think those fears are
justified depends on your confidence in the ability of Icann to do its job.
THINKSTOCK
It was created in 1998 to take over the task of assigning
web addresses. Until that point, that job was handled by one man - Jon Postel.
He was known to many as the “god of the internet”, a nod to his power over the
internet, as well as his research work in creating some of the systems that
underpin networking.
Mr Postel, who
died not long after Icann was created,was in charge of the Internet Assigned
Numbers Authority (IANA). Administration of the IANA was contracted to the
newly-formed Icann, but the US's National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA), part of the Department of Commerce, kept its final say
over what it was able to do.
It’s that final detail that is
set to change from October. No longer will the US government - through the NTIA
- be able to intervene on matters around internet naming.
It rarely intervened. Most
famously, it stepped in when Icann wanted to launch a new top-level domain for
pornography, “.xxx”. The government wanted Icann to ditch the idea, but it
eventually went ahead anyway.
From October, the “new” Icann
will become an organisation that answers to multiple stakeholders who want a
say over the internet. Those stakeholders include countries, businesses and
groups offering technical expertise.
Best option
“It's a big change,” remarked
Prof Alan Woodward from the University of Surrey.
"It marks a transition from
an internet effectively governed by one nation to a multi-stakeholder governed
internet: a properly global solution for what has become a global asset."
Technically, the US is doing this
voluntarily - if it wanted to keep power of DNS, it could. But the country has
long acknowledged that relinquishing its control was a vital act of
international diplomacy.
Other countries, particularly
China and Russia, had put pressure on the UN to call for the DNS to be
controlled by the United Nations’ International Telecommunication Union.
GETTY IMAGES
Instead, the US has used its
remaining power over DNS to shift control to Icann, not the UN.
In response to worries about
abuse of the internet by foreign governments, Icann said it had consulted
corporate governance experts who said its the prospect of government
interference was “extremely remote”.
"The community’s new powers to challenge board
decisions and enforce decisions in court protect against any one party or group
of interests from inappropriately influencing Icann,” the group said in a Q&A section on its website.
As for how it will change what
happens on the internet, the effects will most likely be minimal for the
average user.
"This has nothing to do with
laws on the internet,” Prof Woodward said.
"Those still are the
national laws that apply where it touches those countries.
"This is more about who
officially controls the foundations of the Internet/web addresses and domain
names, without which the network wouldn't function."
No comments:
Post a Comment