Analysis: The new Internet order

The US National Telecommunication & Information Agency (NTIA) has stated clearly what should happen at the end of next month. It will stop funding the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (Iana) - which hands out IP addresses to the main registries - and will step aside for a new Iana, controlled by industry representatives from around the world.

The Internet industry has set up an International Forum on the White Paper (IFWP) to discuss a structure for the new authority. Two of its three sessions have already been held - in Reston, Virginia, USA, and Geneva, Switzerland. The million dollar question of who should sit on the board has not been addressed, but "greater understanding" has been reached in a number of areas.

If the IFWP cannot agree on a new authority, the US Government will not hand over its naming powers. Ira Magaziner, Internet advisor to Bill Clinton, made the threat in Reston when he said that if the private sector could not agree on a solution, he would have to concede that the EC was right to insist on strong governmental controls.

The US government bases its power over the Internet on a statute which gives it the authority to set rules for the telecommunications industry. These rules, which include the naming and governance of Internet domains, can be overturned in court. But Gordon Cook, author of the Cook Report on Internet Infrastructure, said that the US government could also exercise practical powers to retain control. "At least eight of the world's 13 root servers are based in the US, so the government could exert pressure on their owners," Cook told Silicon.

So the next few weeks represents the Internet's last chance to be governed by people who understand commerce. But how will the transition work?

Jon Postel, who runs Iana and personally wrote around 30 per cent of the Internet's architecture, this month published his proposal for the new Iana. Agencies that administer the domain names for individual countries should form an Iana Names Council that makes policy for generic domains such as .com, .net and .org, as well as their own country domains, he suggested. Ninety of the 220 agencies worldwide have already announced their support for his alliance.

"This will never be accepted by the US government or by registries such as Ripe and NSI," said Cook. "Most of the agencies on his list are not operational in the countries they claim to represent - they are run by friends of his!"

Cook supports a proposal made by Einar Stefferud, who moderated the first Internet mailing list in the late 1970s. Stefferud, who now runs a network management consultancy in the US, suggested that three councils be set up to cover Internet protocols, IP numbers and IP names.

"His proposal devolves power down one tier," said Cook. "If one of the councils makes a bad decision, people can appeal to the board for a case hearing, via a mailing list. It could stop people from fighting to the death over this," he said.

But as the deadline approaches, the Internet's future is still up in the air. If factions cannot agree on an interoperable solution before 30 September, the Internet could remain the tool of a US government agency for the foreseeable future.