Whose Internet is it anyway?

For the past month, there has been talk about 'who runs the Internet', and it has revealed some very interesting facts that few of the hundreds of millions of computer users actually know.

Did you know that the U.S. government plans to indefinitely retain management of the 'main computers' that direct traffic on the Internet; and that, by doing so, it is ignoring calls by some countries to turn that task over to an international body.

These 'main computers' serve as the Internet's master directories and tell Web browsers and e-mail programs how to direct traffic.

Everyday, we interact with these machines, without knowing it. The primary reason why these computers are a reference for Internet users is because they control our access to domain suffixes. Which means domains like .com, .net, .org and so on for millions of sites are managed by these computers. There are 260 such suffixes, probably including country suffixes, like .jo.

Potentially, with the stroke of a button, the US government can stop all traffic to all sites with one of those suffixes.

The term being used to refer to these computers is "root" servers". There are thirteen of them, and they are managed by a private firm who has been contracted by the US government to do so.

In 1998, the US Commerce Department selected ICANN (International Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers) to handle this, with a board of directors that included international members. The idea was that, once ICANN evolved and achieved a certain set of objectives, the organization could become independant and, therefore, run by its international members.

Recently, the US government has taken a step back, saying that it would instead prefer to maintain the current situation due to "security concerns" and going as far as saying that it is essential as part of the "the foundation of U.S. policy going forward."

Obviously, the Internet's importance is not being under-estimated by the US government.

Accordingly, some European countries are considering withdrawing their support for ICANN, which could result in using different route servers, and therefore different domain names.

This potentially chaotic situation would result in a user's inability to access an American site if he/she is connected through the European servers, and multi-national companies will need new domain names, ending with a suffix other than .com for example, to allow visitors from Europe to view their sites. It's as if you have two, or even more, Internets!

There are very strong demands now for an International Internet Council, to oversee the Internet, to prevent such a fractured scenario from occurring.

Relinquishing control of something as important as the Internet can't be easy; especially for the most powerful country in the world! Who's going to be able to 'force the issue' on the USA.

Although, at the moment, the Internet is doing fine. We are not aware of how the US government exercises its control over Internet content or communications. Why not allow more international involvement? We'll have to wait and see how this saga plays out.

zeid@maktoob.com