NTIA

NTIA letter to ICANN re: PIC spec

From: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
The Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information
Washington, D.C. 20230

To:Dr. Stephen D. Crocker
Chairman of the Board of Directors
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536

Dear Dr. Crocker:

Feb 26, 2013

On February 3, 2013, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) posted for public comment a revised new generic top-level domain name (gTLD) Registry Agreement that includes certain updates and changes, including a Public Interest Commitments Specification. I am writing to express the strong support of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) for this step and commend ICANN for so directly responding to the concerns previously expressed by the members of the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), including the United States, regarding the need for new gTLD applicants' commitments to be binding and enforceable. We therefore appreciate the opportunity to offer initial views on these proposals.

US government gives IANA contract back to ICANN

As expected, the US government has awarded the IANA contract to ICANN. The contract, which covers a number of critical technical functions including acting as the Internet's top-most directory, will run for three years with two optional extensions of two-years. It contains a number of new requirements and clauses, the most important of which are separation from policy work, and a series of reporting requirements. Earlier this year, the award process was thrown into disarray when the US government's procurement arm so no one had met the new criteria, including ICANN which has run the contract since it was first awarded in 1999. ICANN is under pressure to improve the way it runs IANA if it wishes to retain the contract past 2015.

Strickling issues warnings over Internet governance

US Assistant Commerce Secretary Larry Strickling gave a broad-ranging speech covering everything from the current privacy debate to the IANA contract, WCIT meeting in December and ICANN's new gTLD process and general accountability.

There were no bombshells but Strickling made it clear that he rejecting some calls to make discussions around a privacy code of conduct a closed-doors discussion. He also gently chided ICANN and warned that he was still watching the organization closely on its promises to improve accountability as well deals with policy and compliance problems.

He finished his speech but warning against about the potential dangers of the WCIT meeting to be held in Dubai in December.

Larry Strickling speech on IANA, ICANN and Privacy

Keynote Speech by Lawrence E. Strickling Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information U.S. Chamber of Commerce Telecommunications and E-Commerce Committee

Read it on the NTIA website.

Washington, D.C.

June 15, 2012

I am pleased to be invited to address today’s meeting of the Telecommunications and E-Commerce Committee at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Today is a particularly timely opportunity to address the multistakeholder process of policymaking for the Internet as it has been a busy spring for developments in this area.

Data privacy public comment period summary

Summary

The response to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration's request for public comment on the multistakeholder process proposed in the Privacy and Innovation Blueprint was huge: 86 comments were submitted by major corporations, small companies, industry groups, consumer and privacy advocacy groups, civic groups, a couple of senators and the Council of Europe Secretariat.

If you become a .Nxt member, in addition to the transcript, you are provided with a summary of the transcript's contents, including:

  • Context: What has happened in the lead-up to the meeting in order to provide a better understanding of what results
  • Results: What decisions were taken (or not taken) and why
  • An executive summary: An overview of the topics and discussions to get a full idea of what happened
  • A full summary: The next best thing to reading the entire transcript. Quotes, speakers, arguments, topics and threads - everything you need to know.
  • Hyperlinks: both to the relevant parts of the transcript and related documents: if you want to know precisely what was said on a given topic, or the source document, just click.

If you are already a member, please login.

If not a member, you can purchase recurring monthly membership, or an instant access voucher, good for 24 hours. Or save money with an upfront annual membership fee. Please go to our membership page for more details.

Abine, Inc., a Boston-based online privacy startup, provided NTIA with a tutorial on: online data collection; the data broker industry; and, "restrictions on developer innovation in the mobile privacy realm".

Topics to discuss

"Due to a lack of consumer awareness of the existence of data brokers, complex opt-outs, severe risks of harm, and an industry history of deceptive behavior, the current state of the data broker industry is unacceptable to consumers," argued Abine in recommending five areas for "clarification and investigation" through the multistakeholder process:

  1. data accuracy;
  2. opt-out definition and process;
  3. transparency of data sources;
  4. compliance and compliance assurance; and,
  5. special care for high-risk groups, such as law enforcement professionals and individuals who have been stalked, abused or had their identities stolen.

Why only Business can save the Internet from itself

by Kieren McCarthy | 8 May 2012 |

It's time for Internet organizations to ditch the palace politics and grow up

Starting next week, the United Nations in Geneva will host a series of back-to-back meetings with a broad focus: deciding the ways in which the future of the Internet will be decided.

Most meetings are open and attendance is free. And yet, despite the low barriers to entry, one key demographic is largely missing: business.

For example, of the 300 people registered with an online website covering the first of four conferences (the WSIS Forum), only 26 identify themselves as coming from the private sector, and of them, only 11 are not from specialist Internet infrastructure companies.

The same pattern is repeated at the conference that follows: consultations over the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). And business numbers will fall even further for the last two: "enhanced co-operation" and the annual meeting of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD).

Don't text and drive: An analysis of the new IANA contract

by Sam Dickinson | 25 Apr 2012 |

The Request for Proposals (RFP) for the IANA contract has been reissued, with no substantive changes to the meat of the requirements of the IANA function, but plenty of additional contractual clauses added to govern the organization that performs the function.

The key changes at a glance:

  • Most obvious: date changes for the submission deadline (now 31 May 2012) and for the new IANA contract dates (now 1 Oct 2012 - 30 Sep 2015).
  • Most amusing: the Department of Commerce has, since the November RFP, decided that toxic chemical spills are an unlikely by-product of the IANA function and has removed the relevant contract clause (If you're interested, IANA contractors now don't have to worry about 52.223-13 Certification Of Toxic Chemical Release Reporting (Aug 2003)).
  • Most intriguing: the US Government's rights to IANA deliverables are reinforced in multiple ways, from Section F.5, "Government Rights to Deliverables" to Sections H.3, "Patent Rights—Ownership by the Government" and H.5, "Rights in Data—Existing Works".
  • Most likely to put non-lawyers to sleep: 21 new contract clauses are listed in Section I. Non-lawyers who don't fall asleep, however, will be rewarded by the idiosyncratic inclusion of Section I.24, "52.223-18 Encouraging Contractor Policies To Ban Text Messaging While Driving (Aug 2011)".

How the re-issued IANA RFP differs from the cancelled RFP

by Sam Dickinson | 25 Apr 2012 |

On 17 April, the NTIA reissued its request for proposals for the IANA contract, having unexpectedly cancelled the previous RFP on 10 March noting that no bidder has reached its criteria.

We have carried out a close review of both RFPs and below is a full summary of the changes. We have also produced an analysis of what these changes may mean both for the current IANA contract holder, ICANN, and for the IANA contract itself.

Sections A through to D are unchanged, apart from fixing up a numbered list that included C.4.2 three times in a row, instead of C.4.1 through to C.4.3.

Page 26:

One new sentence added to end of Section E.1, "Inspection and acceptance":

"The Government reserves the right to inspect the premises, systems, and processes of all security and operational components used for the performance of all Contract requirements and obligations."

Page 29:

So, where did ICANN fail the IANA RFP?

by Kieren McCarthy | 13 Mar 2012 |

Updated The most significant Internet governance news this week has been the US government canceling the rebidding process for the crucial IANA contract because no one had met its contract criteria.

The impact of this news was immediately felt by ICANN, holder of the IANA contract. It meant that, despite having run the technical services that IANA represents for more than a decade, it had failed to meet the criteria to retain it.

Ironically, ICANN was given a six-month extension on the contract until the NTIA/USG has a chance to rerun the process. But the news led immediately to two big questions:

  1. Did anyone but ICANN apply?
  2. Why did ICANN's application fail?

We have spent the past two days trying to find out the answers to both - something made significantly harder by the fact that ICANN doesn't want to talk about it and currently claims it is not able to release any information about its bid; and the NTIA feels constrained by Federal procurement rules to say anything.

ICANN had no idea IANA rejection was coming

by Kieren McCarthy | 10 Mar 2012 |

In a worrying turn of events, it appears that ICANN had no idea about the rejection of its bid for long-term running of the IANA contract prior to an announcement being posted on the NTIA's website today.

The organization - which has run the IANA functions for over a decade - is also waiting to hear why the US government feels it has failed to meet the RFP criteria that defined a new, more open approach to the contract.

In a series of sudden and unexpected announcements earlier today, the NTIA first announced it was canceling the entire rebid process for IANA, then that it was canceling it because no one had met its criteria, and then that it was extending ICANN's IANA contract for six months to give it time to re-run the RFP process.

ICANN was aware of the IANA contract extension, having held some discussions in recent days but it appears it was completely unaware that its RFP bid had been rejected - alongside any others that may also have bid - and still has no idea what the reasons are for the rejection.

Syndicate content