Virtually every speech about the tremendous growth and opportunity of
today's Internet starts off with an acknowledgment that its precursor,
the NSFNET, was merely a handful of nuclear physicists and a half dozen
computer scientists connected by a few tin cans and some digital string.
So, now that I have the opportunity to address so many of the individuals
whose groundbreaking accomplishments are often minimized, I would first
like to say thank you for your vision, ingenuity, and decades of hard work
that built the foundation on which we one day may connect the entire world.
I would also like to congratulate Doug Van Houweling from the University
Corporation for Advanced Internet Development (UCAID), Vint Cerf of MCI,
Joseph Naccio of Qwest, Nortel, Cisco and all of the other organizations
and institutions that helped make possible Vice President Al Gore's announcement
of the Next Generation Internet. The NGI project, which partners over $500
million in private investments with federal investments for Internet research
and development, will help build a faster, more secure and reliable network
that will foster new and innovative applications, speed the pace of academic
research, and bring terabits of information and new and exciting discoveries
to American students. Everyone in the Administration is tremendously excited
about the promise this public and private sector partnership brings for
education and technology development in this country and eventually across
the globe.
Under the leadership of President Clinton and Vice President Al Gore,
the United States has a national policy priority to ensure that all of
our citizens have access to new technologies and services, so that they
gain the important tools and skills needed to succeed in the global economy.
Yesterday, Secretary Daley released the Emerging Digital Economy report
(http://www.ecommerce.gov) . The
report underlines the importance of information technologies to the economy,
businesses and consumers. In order to fuel the new electronic economy,
we must prepare a pool of talented, skilled workers to fill the positions
the industry is expected to create early into the next century. The reality
is that technology literacy is becoming just as fundamental to a person's
ability to obtain a good job as the traditional "three Rs."
And the challenge to prepare the work force for the 21st
century will be a great one indeed. In January of this year, the Department
of Commerce's Office of Technology Policy (OTP) released an update to last
year's report "America's New Deficit: The Shortage of Information Technology
Workers." In this update, OTP reports that between 1996 and 2006, the United
States will require more than 1.3 million IT workers to fill the U.S. demand
for computer scientists and engineers, systems analysts, and computer programmers.
Just after the turn of the century, the demand for computer engineers and
scientists is expected to increase from 427,000 in 1996 to 912,000; that
is an 114 precent increase over 10 years. Similarly, the number of system
analysts is projected to double from over 500,000 in 1996 to over 1 million
shortly after the turn of the century. Further, the demand for computer
programmers is expected to increase by 23 percent to nearly 700,000.
To successfully train and educate students to fill these critical positions,
the underlying facilities and technologies, such as connections to the
NGI, will become a critical component for universities and schools.
Networks for People / TIIAP
Building terabit-per-second networks, however, doesn't help if they
only connect networks to networks. Networks must connect people. The Connect
2 Tomorrow project in Jackson, Mississippi, is an example where this is
being accomplished. Connect 2 Tomorrow will use the Internet to provide
chronically ill children at the University of Mississippi Medical Center
the chance to continue their education and maintain contact with peers,
teachers and families.
The Mississippi project received a grant from the Department of Commerce's
Telecommunications and Information Infrastructure Assistance Program (TIIAP)
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/otiahome/tiiap/index.html,
which is administered by my agency. TIIAP, an acronym only a bureaucrat
could love, is a competitive, merit-based program that provides matching
grants to state and local governments, libraries, health care providers,
community groups, schools, universities, and other not-for-profit entities
to access new telecommunications and information technologies. In its first
four years, TIIAP has provided $100 million to 332 telecommunications and
information projects, leveraging $150 million in local matching funds.
It is the most competitive grant program in the country.
The grants provided by the TIIAP program help transform the fiber and
digital packets of the Internet backbone into real-life applications that
work for people.
One great example of what our program can accomplish through government
and private sector partnership can be found at Minot State University.
An institution of higher learning that wanted to meet the challenge of
providing distance learning and education to remote areas of northwest
North Dakota, Minot State University had an idea to connect the people
in those communities via a wide area network. A grant from NTIA's TIIAP
program helped make North Dakota Wide Area Network (NDWAN) possible. NDWAN
brings distance learning, adult education, university financial aid, and
information resources to seven communities in the area. In building the
network, the university has found that the more contact the university
has with people in the area, the more opportunity people have to direct
their efforts in ways that are truly useful.
Although the TIIAP grant money has run out for NDWAN, with the help
of their private sector partners the network continues to expand and grow,
hosting community forums, providing services for the disabled, and offering
other on-line services to its Minot State University students and the community.
Additional information on the TIIAP program and projects we have funded
is located on NTIA's website at www.ntia.doc.gov
. I invite you to take a look at some of these projects to see how organizations
with modest budgets are making a difference by connecting networks to people.
It is truly inspiring. I also hope it will lead to an application from
you to the program.
Persuading almost any institution, whether it is a large world renowned
university, small community oriented college, or private sector partner,
to make a significant investment in new and sometimes unproven technology,
can be a difficult task. I recently returned from the International Telecommunication
Union's Development Conference in Malta, where I heard firsthand the extent
to which many developing and underfunded nations are making Internet access
for their students and citizens a national priority. In countries such
as South Africa, Ethiopia, Uganda, Zambia and Senegal, where they are facing
the challenge of bringing just one telephone to an entire village of people,
many public officials, university administrators and research institutions
are investing significant amounts of their scarce financial resources into
Internet technology. And their investments which would likely seem a pittance
to many U.S. institutions of higher education are paying off. The adopters
of these technologies are reporting greater collaboration and resource-sharing
between academic and research institutions at lower costs.
Tomorrow I leave to join Secretary Daley in Argentina for the Latin
American Telecommunications Summit (LATS). LATS is an important forum where
regional industry and government participants can come together to discuss
telecommunications liberalization and freely exchange ideas on telecommunications
issues. The Summit is also an excellent setting for U.S. telecommunications
companies to promote their services and products. We will bring information
on TIIAP and explain how applications of technology are transforming our
country in the hope that other countries will work to bring the benefits
of information technology to their citizens.
E-rate/Universal Service
In this country, President Clinton and Vice President Gore have made
it our highest priority to connect every school, library, clinic, and hospital
to the Internet by the year 2000. The level of interest in the "E-rate,"
the discounted rate approved by the FCC last year that will enable our
schools to become early adopters, is exposing the deep, pent-up demand
from our learning institutions for telecommunications technologies that
will aid in teaching and learning. To date, 47,000 schools and libraries
from across the country have applied to be eligible for the discount. There
is extraordinary excitement about this effort.
And yet, there are those who argue that we are spending too much money,
time, and attention on this issue. Some suggest that we are sacrificing
our poor and rural consumers for these concerns. Nothing could be farther
from the truth. The "E-rate" discount plan is heavily targeted to the poorest
and most rural of our institutions. Its very design embodies our deepest
concern for those areas of our country--both geographic and economic--that
are least likely to have the resources to keep up with the wave of technical
upgrading that is happening in our more affluent and suburban areas.
We have a 60 year national commitment to universal service. And let
me state unambiguously that we are fully committed to keeping telephone
prices across the country affordable, and are working diligently with the
FCC to achieve this result. But let us not be distracted by a false choice
between rural and poor children and rural and poor households. Both deserve
our attention. Both are a priority. And this nation, the wealthiest nation
in the history of the world, can and must accomplish both goals.
Internet Telephony
Another false choice has been created in the debate over universal service
and Internet telephony. We can have both a vibrant Internet with innovative
new applications and a sufficient, sustainable universal service fund without
sacrificing either of these goals. As I said in my letter to the FCC last
week, there are legitimate concerns about how new players will contribute
to a fair and equitable universal service fund. But to impose an old regime--one
that we are trying to reform-- on innovators who are market testing new
technologies, at this point in the evolution of these new applications
does not make sense. Let me state it another way: Why on earth would we
impose an admittedly flawed regulatory regime on a new application that
holds so much promise?
The FCC correctly understood that this issue and many other issues that
arise with the convergence of transmission of bits and computing need a
great deal of sorting out. The Commission noted that it is not in the economic
interest of our country or supportive of the principle of universal service
to thwart the development of applications that may provide a competitive
alternative to monopoly offerings.
Domain Names
Perhaps the driving theme in our discussions about the success of the
Internet, and the promise of the NGI initiative, is the success of private
sector and government partnership in helping to fund and establish new
technologies. However, when and where the private sector can manage the
technology on its own, or when government involvement becomes unnecessary
or untenable, the Clinton Administration believes that government should
let the private sector lead. Private sector leadership is the underlying
principle of the Framework for Global Electronic Commerce, the Clinton
Administration's approach to electronic commerce policy. As a part of this
initiative, private sector leadership is also a central principle in the
Administration's policy on Internet domain names.
I know that many of you are particularly interested in this issue and
I want to keep you up to date as to where we are.
As many of you know, major components of today's Internet, including
the Internet domain name system, are still performed by or subject to agreements
with agencies of the U.S. Government. As the Internet has become an international
medium for commerce, education and communication, we believe that it has
outgrown the legacy system of technical management, and faces increasing
pressure for change from different quarters.
As part of the Framework for Global
Electronic Commerce, President Clinton directed the Secretary of Commerce
to work to privatize, increase competition in, and promote international
participation in the Internet domain name system. In keeping with this
charge and after a Request for Comment in July 1997, the Department of
Commerce, working through an inter-agency process, released Improvement
of Technical Management of Internet Names and Addresses in January
of this year. Don't you love the way bureaucrats speak? The "Green Paper"
as it is frequently called proposes the transition of a few, primarily
technical Internet functions to a new not-for-profit corporation established
by the private sector.
I would like to note, however, that the
Green Paper as written and released is a proposal of the Department of
Commerce. It is not a final statement of Commerce or Administration policy.
The purpose of the Commerce Department proposal is to improve the technical
management of the DNS only. The Green Paper does not propose a monolithic
Internet governance system. We envision that
this new corporation, acting for the benefit of the Internet as a whole,
would be responsible for coordinating only the assignment of Internet Protocol
(IP) numbers, coordinating the assignment of Internet protocols, managing
the Internet root server system, and establishing policy for adding new
generic top-level domains (gTLDs).
The Internet has many constituencies worldwide that all have a stake
in the smooth running of the Internet. Accordingly, we believe that to
be responsive to the needs of the many stakeholder groups, the new
corporation's board of directors should be balanced and represent the functional
and geographic diversity of the Internet. Let me repeat that we envision
the board to be composed of representatives from the commercial user
community, the IP numbering authorities, the technical community, domain
name registration bodies, and the not-for-profit user community.
We also recognize that the most important component in the transition
of these functions to the private sector is maintaining the stability of
the Internet for all users. Under the plan proposed in the Green Paper,
the U.S. Government would gradually transfer authority over these functions
to the new corporation, beginning as soon as possible, with operational
responsibility transferred by the end of September 1998. Until the new
corporation is established and stable, the U.S. Government would participate
in policy oversight, phasing out as soon as possible but in no event later
than September 2000.
We suggest that the system for registering domain names--the registrar
function--and the operational management of generic top-level domains--the
registry function--be moved into a competitive environment. We note that,
while there appears to be broad consensus that the registrar function
should be competitive, we recognize that there is disagreement within the
Internet community on whether the registry function should be market-driven.
We have received numerous comments on the issue of for profit versus not-for-profit
registries and will be studying this issue
carefully in the coming weeks.
Further, we suggest that the operation
and management of the ".edu" top level domain, in which I know many of
you are already registered, would shift to a separate not-for-profit entity.
We will seek to promote greater use and competition in the ".us" domain,
which suffers from a system of rather complex and cumbersome organization.
We have received over six hundred and fifty
comments on our proposal from commercial entities, not-for-profit organizations,
national governments, the academic community and individual end- users
world wide. Although the comment period officially closed on March 23,
they continue to come in. The comments we received on the Green Paper were
extremely thoughtful and constructive and we intend to review and respond
to them. However, because NTIA is in the middle of a rulemaking proceeding
subject to the Administrative Procedure Act, I will refrain from speculating
about the results of our review. We hope that after appropriate
modifications are made to the plan in response to public input, reasonable
consensus--both internationally and domestically--can be reached in the
coming months.
The full text of the proposal and all comments
received are located on the NTIA web page at www.ntia.doc.gov.