Chapter 7 THE LAYERED INTERNET ARCHITECTURE: GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES A. Introduction The technical debate did not happen at WSIS and perhaps it would not have been timely. The priorities ZHUHFOHDUO\WRHVWDEOLVK´ZKHWKHUWKHUHDUHVLJQLÀFDQW ,QWHUQHW JRYHUQDQFH PDWWHUV EHFDXVH LW FDQ LQÁXHQFH problems with existing governance mechanisms, and the economic and social opportunities for all peoples. whether there are any pressing but unresolved issues that Given the proven track record of the Internet as an need to be tackled through international cooperation.”1 innovation platform, it is only rational that Internet It is to be hoped that the Internet Governance Forum governance policy should be aimed at strengthening ,*) ȥWKHSRVW:6,6VXFFHVVRUWRWKH:*,*ȥZLOO and improving this foundational characteristic. So far provide a platform to engage technology and policy at LQKXPDQKLVWRU\WKHUHKDVQHYHUEHHQDÁDWWHUÀHOG the same time. This will not be an easy task as there are for ambitious and competitive minds to stake their many public policy issues vying for the attention of the claim to technological fame and fortune. It is entirely IGF. It is easy to reinterpret just about any action line feasible that the next Internet “killer application” may IURPWKH:6,6ÀQDOGRFXPHQWVDVEHLQJDJRYHUQDQFH come from a developing country. Internet governance issue, in addition to the fact that almost one third of can assist this process. However, caution and deep the outcome deals explicitly with Internet governance. UHÁHFWLRQVKRXOGEHH[HUFLVHGDVPLVFRQFHLYHGSROLF\RU UHJXODWLRQFDQEHKDUPIXORUHYHQGHWULPHQWDOȥXVXDOO\ This chapter proposes that Internet governance should to a disproportionate extent for developing countries. be consistent with the layered nature of the Internet’s WHFKQLFDO DUFKLWHFWXUH 0RUH VSHFLÀFDOO\ LW VKRXOG The Internet governance debate is wide open. The respect the layers principle and its corollaries. What World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) GRHVWKLVPHDQ"8QIRUWXQDWHO\DWWHPSWLQJDGHÀQLWLRQ succeeded in mainstreaming this important issue while at this point would be well nigh impossible. Similarly, perhaps disappointing only the most fervent optimists restating the need for consistency and principles in who may have hoped that a conclusive governance PRUHDFFHVVLEOHWHUPVFDQUHTXLUHRYHUVLPSOLÀFDWLRQV framework could have been established and set in WKDW ZLOO REVFXUH WKH LVVXHV DW VWDNH ȥ DQG WKXV ZLOO motion. The WSIS events in Geneva and Tunis, as well as be avoided. What this chapter proposes is to develop the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG), the notion of the layers principle and its relation to highlighted a diversity of views and approaches to the Internet governance from its particular elements to the Internet governance issue. Perhaps the diversity was point where its meaning becomes obvious. However, somewhat too diverse and therein lies one of the key before going into technical and policy discussions, we challenges of the post-WSIS process. will present several ideas that underscore the need for this discourse. What is needed in the continuation of the deliberations is convergence. However, it would be premature to seek The layers principle is at the same time simple and convergence around prejudgement of an outcome. opaque. The reason is that it requires an appreciation Today, and thanks to WSIS and WGIG, we have a of the technology underlying the Internet protocol better understanding of common terminologies and suite. It also requires an understanding that without the GHÀQLWLRQV:KDWZHQHHGWRPRYHIRUZDUGLVDVHWRI SURWRFROWKHUHLVQR,QWHUQHWȥLQVSLWHRI DOOWKHZLUHV criteria that will allow the development of policy and servers and networking hardware currently deployed. regulatory principles for Internet governance that are If we can govern well only what we understand, coherent and relevant to the Internet as a technological it follows that policymakers need to develop a medium and that maintain its positive relationship VXIÀFLHQWWHFKQRORJLFDOXQGHUVWDQGLQJRI WKH,QWHUQHW with technological innovation and economic and social protocol suite in order to establish quality in Internet development. governance. 275 276 CHAPTER 7 THE LAYERED INTERNET ARCHITECTURE: GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES Policymakers should go beyond understanding the ,QWHUQHWVKRXOGÀUPO\UHVLVWEHFRPLQJPRUHOLNHWKHVH economic and social implications of the Internet. They old technologies and policy should support this. This need to understand the technological Internet and how also implies a move away from governing and regulating its structure is intimately related to social and economic by type of service, infrastructure or geographical issues and outcomes, in order to develop an effective reach.2 Most importantly, it entails a conscious decision framework of governance. Conversely, technologists to explore network communications layers as the basis need to understand that the issues of legitimacy and for governance policy and regulation. responsibility in governance are inseparable from HIÀFDF\ ,Q D VFHQDULR UHPLQLVFHQW RI WKH SURYHUELDO The discussion that follows owes much to the analysis two cultures, policymakers and technologists should developed by Werbach (2002, 2004) Solum and Chung seek convergence. This is not unusual and we can (2003), Kruse, Yurcik and Lessig (2000) and Benkler identify similar developments in other current (2000). After developing the concept of the layered deliberations, such as poverty alleviation or climate Internet, the chapter will develop the layers principle change. Establishing a bridge between technologists ZKLOHUHÁHFWLQJRQVXSSRUWLQJSULQFLSOHVDQGFRUROODULHV and policymakers is therefore crucial to the positive and addressing criticism. The chapter will then examine and productive outcome of the Internet governance more closely the nature of the layers principle from debate. However, rallying together in the abstract may the perspective of its use in decision-making in policy be unproductive. Therein lies the value of developing and regulatory environments. The chapter will end a set of axiomatic principles upon which to focus the with a discussion on the need for integrating the above international debate on Internet governance. notions into the post-WSIS Internet Governance Forum (IGF) process. This chapter does not suggest that the layers principle should become immovable and eternal Internet law. It does not suggest that it may be the only or most ZRUWK\SULQFLSOHȥRWKHUSULQFLSOHVFDQEHGHYHORSHG B. Layers and the Internet discussed and established. However, it does advance architecture the idea that the layers principle and its corollaries are fundamental for establishing a rational and workable policy and regulatory framework for Internet 1. Protocols and layers governance. More broadly, this chapter advises policymakers that these principles are vital for building The origin and development of the Internet have been out an Internet that promotes economic democracy explained and discussed in many reference sources. and innovation opportunity for all. This notion should Readers are invited to consider, in particular, “A brief be of particular concern for developing nations sizing history of the Internet” (Internet Society, 2003)3 up the development potential presented by information for more details. This chapter will, however, avoid and communication technologies (ICTs). While wealthy developing a historical perspective on the architecture nations could conceivably afford to occasionally of the Internet. use network technologies or implement governance policies that occasionally violate the layers principle, The Internet is still changing and its underlying GHYHORSLQJ FRXQWULHV PD\ ÀQG VXFK D SUDFWLFH WR EH technology and practical uses will evolve with increases costly and detrimental to building their information in bandwidth and convergence of various delivery societies and closing the digital divide. technologies and media, as well as with the development of new applications. The economics will change The governance policy and regulatory concerns are DFFRUGLQJO\DQGLQWHUDFWLRQDQGVRPHWLPHVFRQÁLFWV important when we consider that eventually all ICTs between those that provide content, delivery pipes will converge into the Internet (Werbach, 2002). The and attention will lead to new business models and question is: do we recognize the value and contribution HQYLURQPHQWV$WWHQWLRQSURYLGHUVȥWKHRQOLQHSXEOLF of the Internet and do we understand the role of its DXGLHQFHDWODUJHȥDUHRI SDUWLFXODUVLJQLÀFDQFHLQWKLV layered structure and open standards in permitting this equation as online advertisement revenue continues to amazing development of the global digital network? grow in importance for many enterprises.4 If we do, the only possible conclusion is that all other converging applications, such as broadcast and cable While nothing stays the same, the fundamental technical television, radio and telephony, should be guided structure of the Internet acts as a springboard for to assimilate the Internet’s qualities. Conversely, the FKDQJH0RUHVSHFLÀFDOO\LWLVWKH,QWHUQHWSURWRFROVXLWH INFORMATION ECONOMY REPORT 2006 CHAPTER 7 THE LAYERED INTERNET ARCHITECTURE:GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES ANDPOLICIES 277 that provides the stability of the Internet. It is often and so forth. These are the data link layer, the network called the TCP/IP suite, a name combined from the layer, the transport layer and the application layer. The abbreviations of the two most important components TCP/IP suite merges the physical layer and the