From: "Andy Gocke" <agocke@gmail.com>
To: <DNSTransition@ntia.doc.gov>
Date: Sun, Jul 9, 2006 12:23 AM
Subject: Internet Government

I see the only reasonable way to govern the Internet is to keep it under
control of the United States ICANN group. The first reason is the simple
fact that it is the creation of the United States, and thus is under United
States jurisdiction. Although other countries may use the Internet, they had
little to no hand in its creation (the World Wide Web is not the Internet,
despite the belief of many).

Second, by opening up the Internet to other countries, it creates a UN of
sorts for the Internet. We can see the effect that that has simply by
looking at the UN. Since any country (regardless of human rights violations
or totalitarianism) is allowed into the UN, the UN is so deadlocked by these
fundamentally opposing forces, freedom and tyranny, that nothing productive
is ever achieved in the UN. If this happens with the Internet, it could fall
apart. At the moment, Moore's Law says that CPU speed is doubling every 18
months. This is a tremendously short time span and only signals the
incredible rate at which the Internet and Information Technology is growing.
If such a deadlock were to happen to the Internet, creativity would be
stifled, growth would be slowed, and its even possible that a possible
problem (IPv4) may never be solved and the Internet may totally fall apart.

Lastly, the Internet must maintain its element of fair use and equal
protection. So far the Internet has been a haven of free speech and freedom
in its most sublime form. Even though the United States may not be the most
populous country, or the largest, etc the United States gives that freedom
to all who use the Internet, whereas other countries may seek to censor or
control the Internet. For example, China currently censors Internet access
for its citizens, imagine what the Internet would be like if China had the
authority to censor not just their citizens, but the citizens of many
countries. By allowing other countries to share in the control of the
Internet, it allows other countries to bend the Internet to their will -
contrary to all the beliefs of Americans. We, as Americans, must see our
responsibility to safe guard freedom when it may be taken from us - by
allowing other countries control over the internet, it may begin a slippery
slope that freedom loses its control all together.

The United States and ICANN has so far done an excellent job of sustaining
the Internet, and no technical problems of any large magnitude have
practically been presented against it. ICANN can continue to do a great job
in the technical upkeep with the support of the US. If IPv4 presents a
problem, IPv6 can be implemented and although the current DNS system may
have some difficulties, the basic idea can be kept with some small tweaking
(eliminating the possibility of transmitting a virus or bug via the DNS
system?). Lastly, by increasing the redundancy of the current system (more
root servers), the Internet should be safe from technical harm. Overall, the
United States is fully in control of the situation and is the only viable
option for control of the internet.

Thank you,

Andrew Gocke