Internet governance about to get its quadrennial stress test at ITU meeting

278 proposals on table, and some fear they might shift power to governments

The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) kicks off its quadrennial plenipotentiary on Monday, and internet governance organizations are bracing in case the event becomes a forum for nation-states to try to challenge their roles.

The ITU is the United Nations' specialized agency for information and communication technologies, meaning its members are nation-states. The body's role is to facilitate international connectivity, which it does by managing radio spectrum, satellite orbits, and working on relevant technical standards.

Its key standards are pervasive. ITU-T X.509 sets out the rules of public key infrastructure. ITU-T E.164 governs telephone numbers. ITU-T H.264 and 265 define the video codecs used for most online streams.

REG AD

The ITU's role is largely uncontested, yet its work gets very close to that of the organizations who work on technologies that make the internet work.

REG AD

Those bodies include the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF); the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), which oversees the domain name system; and the regional internet registries (RIRs), which manage IP addresses. The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) works on HTML, CSS, and accessibility.

Governments participate in work at those internet governance bodies but are just one voice among many and can't override the consensus-driven decision-making process they use, under a system which has come to be known as the multi-stakeholder governance model.

At a 2025 event called WSIS+20, the United Nations endorsed multi-stakeholder governance by deciding that its Internet Governance Forum (IGF) should become a permanent body. That decision effectively endorsed multi-stakeholder governance, and kept the ITU out of internet standards.

Yet the IGF hasn't met since WSIS+20, so it is yet to start operating meaningfully as a permanent body.

This year's ITU meeting is therefore a moment at which stakeholders can stress-test the delicate balance between the ITU, internet governance bodies, and the emerging IGF. Such a test could see ITU members try to have it pursue new fields that overlap with work performed by internet governance organizations.

This has already happened before. China tried to have the ITU work on "New IP" – a major revision to internet protocol, a technology the IETF manages.

In 2022, Russia and China backed a candidate for the ITU presidency who favored giving nations a stronger role in internet governance, potentialy by having the ITU take over some standards work. That candidate was not elected.

Ahead of next week's meetings, the Internet Society published a background paper that declared it is "actively challenging proposals that could affect the Internet's underlying technical architecture or increase fragmentation, as well as those that could affect connectivity, particularly for remote, underserved, and unserved communities."

REG AD

The society is watching for resolutions on AI, quantum technologies, and other emerging areas that could embed specific technologies in ITU mandates. It also observes that decisions are yet to be made on which bodies should oversee governance of low-earth orbit satellite constellations, submarine cable resilience, and spectrum policy.

ICANN is also watching with interest.

"ICANN welcomes the recognition of the consensus-based WSIS+20 outcomes," the organization told The Register by email.

"At the same time, proposals that seek to expand the ITU's role in areas such as IP-based networks, the Domain Name System, management of Internet resources, and Internet-related public policy issues raise concerns about overlapping mandates and the creation of parallel processes that could affect the health of the Internet."

ICANN didn't point to any specific proposals that raise such concerns, and at ITU meetings most proposals – of which there are 278 this time around – are decided on consensus.

It is, however, possible for ITU members to amend proposals during meetings, leaving open the possibility of significant policy changes coming up for a vote during the 18 days the event occupies. ®