-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 11:42 +0800 4/12/96, Michael Malone wrote:

>Simon and I both believed that COM.AU would be a better option.
>But I did not (and do not) believe that it would be viable to
>just jump in there and say "ok, there's competition now".

Michael,

Please pardon my ignorance, but why not?

It seems that there is intended to be multiple DNA's within the .COM.AU
domain. It seems the only thing holding this back is the unavailability of
the tools and policies to make it possible.

If you are able to implement the tools and policies required to enable
multiple concurrent DNA's in a single 2LD, why not implement them in the
COM.AU domain instead of in a new 2LD?

By investing your time and resources into such development, you would be
helping to establish yourself as a worthy candidate for becoming a
competing DNA in the .COM.AU domain.

At this time the .COM.AU domain needs multiple competing DNA's really
badly. Offering competition in the form of a second 2LD is a second best
option to actually competing within the domain. There is already
competition in the form of alternative domains (.NET.AU, .COM .nf etc).

I think it is worth making every effort to offer competition within the
COM.AU domain as soon as possible.


>Hopefully before they screw people into paying for the next year.

MelbourneIT's bulk renewal incentive is very attractive. I suggest you
have about a week to have a proposal finalised and approved in principle
before a large percentage of domains are renewed taking advantage of this
limited offer.


Yours sincerely,

Richard Archer.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv
Comment: Public Key: <http://interdomain.net.au/~rha/pgpkey.txt>

iQCVAwUBMqUXKTXPU7enfNnZAQHGLwQAnkMNnWamlR7+dAlrafPI5FHSBV+vLCyg
rnQuvUwTHJcsQHLFD/YmhTLsjwcVH4oAK6oJFhPzZaGUxVM8nKqe6xuYfMJw4gSm
6c/BEB636Q8AACv+0wtLg1mhhU3KuzFMbrLGgIdYJ82BM4+OaucEBFTSU7jN3aCQ
z6qcKtQaZ/g=
=3JMF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----