“ICANN has been built to ensure that the Internet works, not for its coordination role to be used to stop it from working.”
That’s ICANN’s response to Ukraine, which earlier this week asked for Russia to lose its top-level domains and IP addresses, to help prevent propaganda supporting its invasion of the country.
The request was arguably based on a misunderstanding of the extent of ICANN’s powers, and CEO Göran Marby says as much in his response last night(pdf) to Ukraine’s deputy prime minister Mykhailo Fedorov:
In our role as the technical coordinator of unique identifiers for the Internet, we take actions to ensure that the workings of the Internet are not politicized, and we have no sanction-levying authority
He goes on to warn about the “devastating and permanent effects” of ICANN suddenly deciding to take unilateral action against .ru, .рф and .su:
For country-code top-level domains, our work predominantly involves validating requests that come from authorized parties within the respective country or territory. The globally agreed policies do not provide for ICANN to take unilateral action to disconnect these domains as you request. You can understand why such a system cannot operate based on requests from one territory or country concerning internal operations within another territory or country. Such a change in the process would have devastating and permanent effects on the trust and utility of this global system.
He concludes:
Within our mission, we maintain neutrality and act in support of the global Internet. Our mission does not extend to taking punitive actions, issuing sanctions, or restricting access against segments of the Internet — regardless of the provocations. ICANN applies its policies consistently and in alignment with documented processes. To make unilateral changes would erode trust in the multistakeholder model and the policies designed to sustain global Internet interoperability.
The response is expected, and I believe broadly, if not unanimously, supported in the ICANN community.
In a line I wish I’d written, the Internet Society’s CEO Andrew Sullivan put it pretty succinctly in a blog post yesterday:
The idea of unplugging a country is as wrong when people want to do it to another country as it is when governments want to do it to their own.
And Sébastien Bachollet, chair of ICANN stakeholder group EURALO, insisted (pdf) that “the Internet must remain intact”.
RIPE NCC, which had been asked to revoke IP addresses supplied to Russian organizations, wrote that it “believes that the means to communicate should not be affected by domestic political disputes, international conflicts or war.”
ICANN may take a short-term PR hit in the wider world, which includes people who have a misunderstanding of how powerful ICANN is and how tenuous its grasp on the powers it does have.
While .ru appears to be safe, there’s nothing I read in Marby’s letter that would preclude it from initiating retirement proceedings against .su, when the proper policies have been approved.
The post ICANN says NO to Ukraine’s Big Ask first appeared on Domain Incite.
Original article: ICANN says NO to Ukraine’s Big Ask
©2022 Domain Observer. All Rights Reserved.