I won't be able to get to the talk given by Vint Cerf at the National Library next week but I think there's some questions about US policy in relation to ICANN that someone should ask him. Attached find some material about the Senate Communications Subcommittee and ICANN. It seems that the US view may be that just like Iraq and its oil the Internet belongs to them and that they have the right to remove this body as they please even though other national entities have signed up to the process. Perhaps Vint could comment? [Note the reference to root name servers and DOS attacks which make this message of operational significance! (:-)] --- [Jan 15, 2003] U.S. Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) announced his top priorities for his chairmanship of the Senate Communications Subcommittee during the 108th legislative session. ICANN Reform STRENGTHENS AND SECURES THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE INTERNET Sen. Burns will take aim at the organization's persistent half-hearted efforts at internal reform. The lack of accountability of this quasi-governmental organization poses serious problems for American national security. The recent "denial of service" (DOS) attack on nine of the 13 Internet "root servers" in October highlights these concerns. Constitutional issues are also troubling, including whether the Commerce Department was within its rights to grant such a huge responsibility to ICANN in the first place, potentially violating the nondelegation clause [of the U.S. Constitution]. This issue demands immediate oversight. Sen. Burns will hold a hearing on ICANN Reform in the spring to address potential legislation to authorize ICANN's continued existence.