10/6/98

THE AUTHOR:

Jay Fenello is the President of Iperdome, Inc., a small, entrepreneurial
company that has been fighting to enter the registry business since
January, 1997.  Iperdome's concept is to provide Netizens with a permanent
address on the Internet, one that does not change when Netizens change
jobs, schools, Internet Service Providers, or email addresses.

Mr. Fenello has a Computer Engineering degree from the University of
Florida, and an MBA in Entreprenuership from the University of Arizona.  He
has been active in the DNS debate since Iperdome formed in early 1997.  He
was . . .
  -  one of the founders of the eDNS movement.
       http://www.iperdome.com/press/315791.htm
  -  one of the first to ask for the U.S.
Government to review the activities of the IAHC.
       http://www.iperdome.com/press/429prn.htm
  -  the only small company representative to attend
       the White House's IATF meeting on June 9th, 1997.
  -  one of the invited speakers at the Domain Name
Conference sponsored by the ITAA, CDT, and ISA.
       http://www.itaa.org/dnsconf.htm
  -  one of the first to frame this debate as
one of control, not domain names.
       http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/080197domain.html
  -  one who has previously testified before the
House Commerce Committee (6/10/98) on this topic:
       http://www.iperdome.com/press/congress.htm


FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE:

Neither the author nor Iperdome, Inc. have received any funds from any U.
S. Government source in the past three years.


STATEMENT:

On June 5, 1998, the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration ("NTIA") of the United States Department of Commerce issued
a policy statement, commonly known as the "White Paper," in which NTIA
called on private sector Internet stakeholders to form a not-for-profit
corporation to administer policy for the Internet name and address system.
Since that time, people all over the world have been working diligently to
meet NTIA's challenge.

While some may claim to have reached that goal, others believe that the
process has gone astray.  To highlight these concerns, please refer to the
press release issued June 5, 1998 titled "COMMERCE DEPARTMENT RELEASES
POLICY STATEMENT ON THE INTERNET DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM."  In that release,
Becky Burr said:

" . . . the policy statement describes a process whereby a new,
not-for-profit corporation formed by the private sector would assume
various responsibilities for DNS administration that are now performed by
or on behalf of the U.S. Government, or by third parties under agreements
with the U.S. Government.  We invite Internet stakeholders from around the
world to work together to form this new entity." 

She also said:  "We are looking for a globally and functionally
representative organization, operated on the basis of sound and transparent
processes that protect against capture by self-interested factions, and
that provides robust, professional management.  The new entity's processes
need to be fair, open, and pro-competitive.  And the new entity needs to
have a mechanism for evolving to reflect changes in the constituency of
Internet stakeholders."

In response to these comments, a sectorally and geographically diverse
group of Internet stakeholders came together under the IFWP banner (The
International Forum on the White Paper).  These stakeholders met at
assorted venues throughout the world, and the result was a series of
consensus points for the new corporation. 

Several weeks ago, the IFWP process broke down as many of the original
supporters decided to negotiate directly with the IANA.  The result was the
ICANN draft, a draft that is deficient in the following ways:
  -  The draft was finalized behind closed doors.
  -  The draft does not include many of the consensus points from the IFWP
process.
  -  The interim board suggested by the draft was presented without any
open nomination process or discussion.
  -  It fails to meet Ira Magaziner's mandate of accountability, as the
ICANN board is only accountable to itself.
  -  It fails to meet the terms as stated by Becky Burr, specifically the
desire for sound and transparent processes, protection against capture, and
fair, open and pro-competitive processes.

The transfer of Internet assets and authority from the U.S. Government to
this New Corporation represents a major departure for the private
administration of a global resource.  And if we were only talking about
Internet resources, the ICANN draft might be sufficient.  The truth of the
matter is, however, that the New Corp will be making public policy
decisions as well as administrative decisions.  Diverse issues like free
speech, access, and privacy will all be affected by decision made by the
New Corp.  It is for these reasons that the ICANN Board MUST be made
accountable to the Internet stakeholders in some way, shape, or form.  (The
IFWP consensus point calls for a membership.)

I hereby suggest that the U.S. Government, as part of their agreement to
transfer assets and authority to this new corporation, provide an oversight
role to ensure these changes are made to the ICANN draft.  This role should
continue unless and until ICANN adopts a membership (or some other method
to make the Board accountable to Internet stakeholders).

In closing, I ask Congress to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure
that these goals are realized.  I thank this committee for this opportunity
to submit this written testimony, and I hope that you will continue to
monitor the transition as outlined in the White Paper process.

Respectfully Submitted,



Jay Fenello,
President, Iperdome, Inc.
Member, IFWP Steering Committee