| |
Final Administration Plan on Domain Name System Could
be Ready in Weeks, Not Months, Lawmakers Told
March 31, 1998
At a March 31, 1998 joint hearing of the House Basic
Research and Technology Subcommittees, the administration
stated that a final plan for administration of the
Internet Domain Name System (DNS) could be in place
very soon.
Ira Magaziner, President Clinton's Internet Advisor,
stated several times that the Clinton administration
intends to hand over administration of domain name
registration to a competitive, private system with
oversight from a privately created, not-for-profit
organization. That vision was presented in a "green
paper" proposed by the Clinton Administration last
year.
Basic Research Subcommittee Chairman Charles "Chip"
Pickering (R-MS) noted that the existing cooperative
agreement between the National Science Foundation
and Network Solutions Inc. (NSI) for the registering
of Internet Domain Names would automatically extend
until September 30, 1998. In light of this deadline,
Pickering asked Magaziner whether a final administration
plan for the future of the DNS would be in place before
that time. Magaziner assured Pickering that a getting
a final plan together should be a "matter of weeks,
not months", and well before September 30th.
The key hurdle preventing completion of a final plan
for DNS administration seems to be objections made
by the Internet Council of Registrars (CORE). That
group had proposed a private plan for moving the global
network away from the current system where one company
-- currently NSI -- acts as sole registrar of top
level domains, like ".com," ".net" and ".org."
Former congressman Jim Courter -- representing the
CORE group -- criticized the Magaziner plan as one
that will perpetuate a monopoly registration system
rather than open competition and ensure better service
and lower prices for Internet users. However, after
questioning by Chairman Pickering, both Courter and
Magaziner indicated they were open to compromise over
the number of registries and other issues.
However, Maganizer noted that CORE is just one of
many competing interests in the debate. He emphasized
that it was the intense backlash against the CORE
plan that prompted the Clinton administration to take
a formal oversight role of the transitional process.
If the differences were only with the CORE group,
consensus, he said, would be easy. Despite the difficulties
at achieving consensus, Magaziner reiterated the governments
intention to have a final, consensus plan in place
very soon.
|
|
