After three years as an independent organisation overseeing the allocation of Internet addresses, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) is considering major changes to the way it operates.
It has called for representatives of governments to help it steer policy, and in effect build a public-private partnership.
The proposal follows complaints from firms that Icann's decision-making processes have become slow and tied to vested interests, and it has been greeted with cautious optimism in the industry.
When Icann was created it was set the mission to "create an effective private sector policy development process capable of administrative and policy management of the Net's naming and address allocation systems".
It was hoped that a private sector body would be able to react faster and with less bureaucracy than a multinational government body. Three years on, Icann has admitted defeat and is now looking for help.
Stuart Lynn, president of Icann, said in a statement: "I have come to the conclusion that the original concept of a purely private-sector body, based on consensus and consent, has been shown to be impractical."
He added that many organisations critical to global co-ordination of domain name assignment had proved unhelpful and have hindered Icann's progress.
However, Lynn argued that a purely governmental body taking Icann's role would be impractical, and so a third way is needed.
Lynn proposes that the system by which Internet users elect Icann board members should be scrapped and replaced with a board of government representatives and various government advisory committees.
"Stable functioning of the internet's naming and address allocation systems is too important to be left on the sidelines," argued Lynn. "Experience has shown that the influence, authority, and close co-operation of governments is essential to accomplish Icann's mission."
While Icann has made some progress recently, setting up new top-level domain names such as.biz and.info, many in the industry agree that the organisation has become unresponsive and unwieldy.
Ken Sorrie, co-founder of domain registrar Internetters, said: "Overall I welcome the proposed changes. Clearly, whatever they've got in place now isn't working. Icann lacks the power and teeth to police the industry effectively, and changes could also help to reduce the dominance of the US over the body."
Sorrie added that the interaction of governments would have to be well managed to avoid conflicts and red tape.
Others agreed that Icann was failing in its work, but questioned whether the proposed changes would improve matters. Randy Bush, co-chairman of the Internet Engineering Task Force, accused the body of being frivolous with its money and said its actions were akin to "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic".
He suggested that Icann should be shrunk down to a size where the body "serves the internet rather than trying to rule it".
A meeting in Ghana this month will debate the suggested reforms. If they are not adopted, it is unclear what Icann will do next. Unless a more efficient system for administering Icann's responsibilities is quickly developed, the development of e-business standards will suffer.
reader comments