[IDNO:548] Congressman Bliley's questions for the Sec of Commerce
Joop Teernstra (terastra@terabytz.co.nz)
Thu, 24 Jun 1999 15:23:58 +1200
The Honorable William M. Daley
> Secretary of Commerce
> U.S. Department of Commerce
> 14th Street at Constitution Avenue, N.W.
> Washington, DC 20230
>
> Dear Secretary Daley:
> I am writing to express my concern about
> recent steps taken by the Internet
> Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
> ("ICANN") as part of its role in
> the transition to privatize management of the
> Internet's Domain Name System
> ("DNS").
>
> The Committee has been following closely the
> evolution of the DNS and has
> supported the efforts to privatize the
> management of this essential element of
> the Internet. I welcomed the call in the
> Department of Commerce's White
> Paper to create a new corporation "governed on
> the basis of a sound and
> transparent decision making-process, which
> protects against capture by a
> self-interested faction." Additionally, since
> your Department's entry into its
> Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") with ICANN
> in November 1998,
> Committee staff has met regularly with
> Department of Commerce officials and
> other interested parties to discuss the
> ongoing activities associated with the
> transfer of the DNS from the public sector to
> the private sector.
>
> As you may recall, in October of last year I
> wrote you and Ira Magaziner,
> then Senior Advisor to the President for
> Policy Development, requesting
> information about your knowledge of the
> selection of ICANN's interim board
> members. Now, as ICANN's interim board begins
> to undertake formation of
> policy that will have far-reaching
> consequences for Internet users, domain
> name holders and companies offering domain
> name registration services, I
> remain troubled about the manner in which the
> interim board members were
> selected, and have new questions about the
> manner in which the interim
> board is operating.
>
> I also am greatly concerned about the interim
> board's imposition of a $1 per
> domain name registration fee and the setting
> of highly regulatory
> accreditation requirements for those who wish
> to offer domain name
> registration services. Such decisions likely
> exceed the authority that the
> White Paper originally contemplated for the
> private organization whose role
> ICANN now is attempting to fulfill. Rather
> than promote the Internet's
> evolution, ICANN's policies actually may
> jeopardize the continued stability of
> the underlying systems that permit millions of
> people to use, enjoy and
> transact business on the Internet.
>
> Moreover, I understand that during the most
> recent ICANN board meeting in
> Berlin last month, the interim board
> reportedly threatened to terminate the
> authority of the incumbent domain name
> registrar - Network Solutions,
> Incorporated ("NSI") - to continue registering
> domain names if NSI fails to
> enter into a registrar accreditation agreement
> with ICANN by June 25, 1999.
> What makes this situation especially
> distressing is that an official from the
> Department of Commerce's National
> Telecommunications and Information
> Administration ("NTIA"), who was present at
> the meeting, failed to discourage
> such a drastic measure. Your Department's
> White Paper called for a
> consensus-based approach to achieving
> privatization of the DNS. I fail to see
> how such threats will lead to this goal.
>
> The governance model being formed for the
> management of the DNS likely
> will set the precedent for future efforts to
> establish a governance structure in
> other critical areas of the Internet.
> Consequently, it is vitally important, not
> only for the future stability of the DNS, but
> for all future Internet governance
> efforts, that the procedures for the
> establishment of governance be fully
> transparent, democratic and open.
>
> Therefore, in order to assist the Committee in
> its review of the present state
> of the transition of the Internet DNS from the
> public sector to the private
> sector, as well as to better understand the
> your Department's oversight of
> ICANN, I would like to learn more about the
> Department of Commerce's
> actions and decisions in this situation.
> Accordingly, pursuant to Rules X and
> XI of the U.S. House of Representatives, I
> request that the Department of
> Commerce provide the following information to
> the Committee by July 6, 1999:
>
> 1. As stated above, it has been reported that
> during the most recent ICANN
> board meeting in Berlin last month, the
> interim board threatened to terminate
> the authority of NSI to continue registering
> domain names if NSI fails to enter
> into a registrar accreditation agreement with
> ICANN by June 25, 1999.
>
> Regarding this reported exchange during
> ICANN's board meeting:
>
> a. Did a member of ICANN's interim board
> threaten to terminate the authority
> of NSI to continue registering domain names if
> NSI fails to enter into a
> registrar accreditation agreement with ICANN
> by June 25, 1999? If so, please
> identify the interim board member in question.
>
> b. Why did the NTIA official present at the
> meeting fail to discourage such a
> drastic measure by ICANN?
>
> c. Does ICANN currently possess the authority
> to terminate the authority of
> NSI to register domain names?
>
> 2. Please answer the following:
>
> a. Did ICANN consult with the Department of
> Commerce regarding ICANN's
> decision to impose a $1 per domain name
> registration fee?
>
> b. Did the Department of Commerce conduct any
> legal analysis relating to
> ICANN's authority to impose a $1 per domain
> name fee? If the Department of
> Commerce did conduct such a legal analysis,
> please provide all records
> relating to the aforementioned legal analysis.
>
> If the Department of Commerce
> did not conduct such a legal analysis, please
> provide a detailed legal
> analysis of ICANN's authority to impose a $1
> per domain name fee, including
> but not limited to the following questions:
>
> i. Is it the legal opinion of the Department
> of Commerce that ICANN is legally
> empowered to impose such a fee?
>
> ii. If so, does ICANN derive the authority to
> impose a $1 per domain name
> registration fee from its MOU with the
> Department of Commerce?
>
> c. Does the Department of Commerce approve of
> ICANN imposing such a
> fee?
>
> 3. A detailed legal analysis of:
>
> a. The Department of Commerce's authority to
> empower ICANN;
>
> b. The nature and scope of oversight authority
> available to the Department of
> Commerce under its MOU with ICANN; and
>
> c. Whether the Department of Commerce's
> cooperative agreement with NSI
> requires NSI to sign a registrar accreditation
> agreement with ICANN.
>
> 4. Records of all communications (whether
> written, electronic or oral)
> between the Department of Commerce (or its
> agents or representatives) and
> ICANN (or its agents or representatives),
> including but not limited to all
> records relating to such communications,
> regarding:
>
> a. Negotiations or other discussions regarding
> the transfer of control of the
> root system to ICANN or an ICANN-affiliated
> entity;
>
> b. Negotiations or other discussions regarding
> future agreements relating to
> the DNS between ICANN and the Department of
> Commerce (excluding
> records of communications provided in response
> to request 4.a. above);
>
> c. The terms of ICANN's registrar
> accreditation agreement, including but not
> limited to the imposition of the $1 per domain
> name registration fee;
>
> d. Termination or alteration of the Department
> of Commerce's cooperative
> agreement with NSI; and
>
> e. Attempts to persuade or force NSI into
> entering a registrar accreditation
> agreement with ICANN, or NSI's refusal to
> enter into the aforementioned
> agreement.
>
> 5. All records relating to the proceedings of
> the Government Advisory Committee to ICANN.
>
> For the purposes of responding to the above
> requests, the terms "records,"
> "relating" and "regarding" should be
> interpreted in accordance with the
> Attachment to this letter. Should you have any
> questions regarding this
> request, please contact me, or have your staff
> contact Eric Link, Committee
> Counsel, or Paul Scolese, Committee
> Professional Staff Member, at (202) 225-2927.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Tom Bliley
> Chairman
>
> cc: The Honorable John D. Dingell
> Ranking Minority Member
>
> __________________________________________________
--Joop Teernstra LL.M.-- , bootstrap of
the Cyberspace Association,
the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
http://www.idno.org
--
This message was sent via the idno mailing list. To unsubscribe send
a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno" to listmanager@radix.co.nz.
For more information about the IDNO, see http://www.idno.org/