![Show Menu](styles/mobile-menu.png)
![Page Background](./../common/page-substrates/page0275.png)
THE CZECH REPUBLIC IN THE WCITǧ12
Stakeholders to be bound by the Treaty
Another seemingly not so serious issue was the determination of parties bounded
by the ITRs. Member States, as the signatories, are formally bound and responsible
for respecting its provisions. Nevertheless, in many countries, including the Czech
Republic, the private sector, represented by operating agencies, implements them.
An appropriate definition of operating agencies is therefore crucial. The original
ITRs text refers to “recognized operating agency” – which is obsolete, since such
entities were meant to be state-owned. Now a days, this arrangement is completely
different as various subjects deal with telecommunications. There were attempts to
make the definition so broad and vague that even internet providers might fall within
it. A solution was found only after lengthy debates at the end of the conference. All
delegates then approved a proposal submitted by Panama:
These Regulations also contain provisions applicable to those operating agencies,
authorized or recognized by a Member State, to establish, operate and engage in
international telecommunications services to the public, hereinafter referred as “authorized
operating agencies”.
Internet Governance
Many services are on-line today, and the Internet seems to be a means of
transport. Some speak about telecommunications services being transmitted via
Internet, such as Voice over IP (VoIP). This is technically incorrect, as the Internet and
telecommunications represent different layers of next-generation-networks. Naming,
numbering and addressing, as connected to telecommunications and Internet, are
therefore completely different issues. The ITU’s terms naming and addressing mean
mainly, but not only, country phone codes,while the Internet naming, numbering
and addressing system means different layer and is followed by ICANN.
8
In spite
of the official declarations at the Opening Ceremony, the role of the ICANN had
been indirectly criticised. There was also an attempt to include the Domain Name
System under the ITU umbrella, or to switch it to the national territory level in
the spirit of the provision 3.8 proposal:
Member States shall, if they so elect, be able
to manage the naming, numbering, addressing and identification resources used within
their territories for international telecommunications.
9
The Czech Republic’s position
was clear – neither mix these two systems together, nor support the idea of such
a national solution. Joint opposition of many delegations led eventually to deletion.
Routing
Some countries proposed details about routing of telecommunications, i.e. the
exact way used for the traffic, which was based on an old setting. The proposed
8
See
www.icann.org– Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) coordinates
the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions, which are key technical services critical to
the continued operations of the Internet’s underlying address book, the Domain Name System (DNS).
9
See Document No. DT-51 Revision 1 dated 11 December 2012 at
http://www.itu.int/md/S12-
WCIT12-121203-TD/en.