n altogether perplexing mix of technologists, business folk, engineers, lobbyists, and lawyers gathered Saturday at the Cambridge Marriott to discuss the future of the Internet. The occasion was the first public meeting of the Internet Corp. for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN - the new nonprofit California corporation that will probably be granted ultimate authority by the US government over all technical aspects of the Internet.
ICANN was created over the summer by Jon Postel and formally incorporated last month. The research scientist at University of California's Information Sciences Institute was one of the inventors of the 'Net. For more than 20 years Postel had presided over the Internet's most technical decisions, recording decisions that were made by rough consensus and helping to resolve conflicts.
Postel also decided who would run the Internet's ''nameservers,'' which connect users to the sites they are looking for, and how 'Net addresses would be apportioned to governments, companies, universities, organizations, or individuals.
But with the rapid commercialization of the Internet in recent years, many people believed it was inappropriate for the Internet's ultimate arbiter to be a single individual. Some people wanted to see this function performed by some kind of elected body. Others, reasoning that governments can't be trusted, thought the Internet's ultimate authority should rest in the hands of private industry.
For more than a year the federal National Telecommunications and Information Administration has wrestled with this question. NTIA put out two papers requesting proposals. Over the summer it received three responses, one from Postel, one from an organization called the Boston Working Group, and one from the Open Root Server Confederation. There was much conflict among the proposals, and many of the participants looked forward to hashing out the details publicly.
Then just two weeks after ICANN was incorporated, Postel died on Oct. 16 from a burst aorta.
Since Postel's death things have moved quickly. On Oct. 20, the Commerce Department wrote to ISI, Postel's home institution, saying the United States intends to move carefully but expeditiously to private management of the Internet address system and essentially gave ISI the green light to set up ICANN.
Shortly thereafter a Washington attorney named Jon Sims telephoned 10 individuals, telling them that they had been chosen by Postel to be ICANN's interim board. Nine agreed. On Oct. 26, the board met in secret and appointed Esther Dyson, a former journalist who now runs Edventure Holdings, a venture capital firm, as its interim chairman.
The Nov. 14 meeting at the Marriott was supposed to be ICANN's first public meeting, but no business of any substance was conducted. Instead, the meeting became a forum in which many people attacked ICANN's proposed procedures, its mandate, and its very legitimacy.
Attendees demanded to know how ICANN's interim board had been chosen. Others demanded to know how ICANN would raise money to conduct business. Still others demanded to know how the organization would be held accountable for its decisions.
Then there was the question on everybody's mind: What gave the government the power to decide the Internet's future? Shouldn't that be done democratically by the Internet's users?
''If we had created an electorate to elect us, the question would have been by what authority are you creating that electorate?'' said Dyson, shortly after the meeting was called to order.
It was somewhat frightening to see Dyson brush aside the democratic desires of the people attending her meeting. Many attendees thought the Internet created the possibility for a new kind of worldwide direct democracy. But instead, the board's initial actions made it look like it would just be a reformation of 20th-century power structures.
The US government seems to think policy decisions in cyberspace are best decided by private corporations that are appointed by government regulators.
''The board's bylaws prohibit the public from attending meetings, permit secret votes, and provide no way for the public to appeal ICANN's decisions,'' wrote commentator Declan McCullagh in an article in Wired News.
A lot of people who didn't bother to attend the meeting largely regard the controversy surrounding ICANN's creation as a tempest in a teapot. After all, they say, the real control of the Internet is already in the hands of companies like MCI, Sprint, and AT&T which actually operate the Internet's long-distance links.
But control over directories and protocols is real power, as the world is just beginning to learn.
''You guys will have a choke hold on the economy of the US and the world,'' said Dan Parisi, who runs the pornographic Web site Whitehouse.com.
Parisi has learned firsthand just how much control an organization like ICANN will potentially wield. His Web site, easily mistaken for a site operated by the US government, has long been a thorn in the side of antipornography advocates and the feds alike. Indeed, Whitehouse.com makes frequent reference to the first couple, going so far as to put their faces on porn models. But the government has n't been able to shut down the site, largely because it does not have a trademark on the word Whitehouse.
Last October, Parisi noticed something odd: The number of visitors coming to his site dropped by 90 percent. Parisi's technical staff said that something was wrong with the Internet's nameservers - a new problem that was only affecting his Web site.
But the Internet's operators at Network Solutions blamed Parisi's crew. The problem kept up for two weeks, costing Parisi more than $50,000. Then, just as quietly as it had started, the problem ended and the situation returned to normal. Was this truly a technical glitch, or a warning? There is no way to tell for sure.
Technology writer Simson L. Garfinkel can be reached at plugged-in@simson.net.
Dow:
