Jordan,
Well summarised.

Keep up the good work.



> From:          "Jordan Green" <jordan&#167;MelbourneIT.com.au>
> To:            <dns&#167;iia.net.au>
> Subject:       Re: DNS: SRS mechanism
> Date:          Tue, 24 Feb 1998 20:42:27 +1100
> Reply-to:      dns&#167;iia.net.au

> At the outset let me apologise to the readership of this mailing list for this
> long posting.
> 
> I am disappointed that Vic, at Australia's own CIA, who is not a new entrant
> in the domain name game and is not new to discussions regarding the role and
> responsibilities of Melbourne IT continues to disseminate misinformation and
> misleading, unfounded allegations (copied below).
> 
> Let's start with the last point in Vic's e-mail regarding the current status
> of the CoRE gTLD initiative. Melbourne IT is NOT accepting preregistrations,
> as was clearly reported in The Australian newspaper on February 3rd (nearly a
> month ago!). Perhaps Vic doesn't read the Australian - fair enough - so he
> would have gone to our website at www.melbourneit.com.au where he would have
> found a clear explanation of the current situation. Still no preregistrations.
> 
> Melbourne IT did advise all of its account holders on January 30 this year
> that on the following Monday we would open our preregistration queues. That
> night the US Department of Commerce released the Ira Magaziner paper which
> fundamentally threatened the imminent launch of the CoRE gTLDs. Talk about bad
> timing!!
> 
> On Monday February 2nd all our account holders received notification that due
> to the change in circumstances Melbourne IT could not ethically continue with
> preregistrations at that time.
> 
> Still, as of this writing, we are waiting to see what turn events take. Once
> we are convinced of the viability and high probability of a new set of TLDs
> then Melbourne IT will respond quickly to allow our customers to take
> advantage of the benefits of preregistration. Since we haven't had
> preregistrations yet it is a mystery to me how Vic can claim that he knows the
> terms and conditions of our eventual process. I invite Vic to explain his
> claimed intimate knowledge of our plans in this forum (word to the wise Vic,
> don't think old information is still accurate information).
> 
> What about the other claims regarding a Shared Registry System for com.au and
> introducing new SLDs for .au?
> 
> Melbourne IT is not the current arbiter of the com.au domain licensing, we are
> only a licensee. If someone has a problem with the current situation then I
> suggest that person make a convincing case to the licensor. Regardless of the
> entry of new licensees Melbourne IT will continue to deliver the most
> efficient and reliable service we can. That same service that has Australia's
> top 19 ISPs giving our customer service a satisfactioin rating over 80%!!
> [Independent survey data - STM Consulting] That same survey also indicated
> that Melbourne IT out performs any other domain name vendor used by those ISPs
> anywhere in the world.
> 
> Vic's question "..how many domains have MIT served out in the last year?"
> seems deliberately misleading. Vic knows very well that we only operate in the
> com.au domain. So Vic the answer must be "Just one".
> 
> As for new SLDs in .au Vic should be addressing this concern to ADNA as
> Melbourne IT has no authority to address this issue.
> 
> When considering the veiled allegations Vic has made regarding the com.au zone
> file I guess he wasn't referring to the connect.com registry that operates
> net.au. However, like them, we have no control over the zone file itself.
> Melbourne IT is compelled under its license to make our registration data
> available for periodic zone file updates. These occur when Munnari (the zone
> file host computer) pulls the new data down from our server, a process
> controlled by the com.au licensor not Melbourne IT. What's more we do not have
> the inclination, time or resources to waste effort trying to sabotage a
> particular domain name when we serve over 35,000 customers with guaranteed
> performance and the highest standards of business ethics.
> 
> So Vic you already have your wish - the com.au zone file is "under the control
> of a neutral party" as you requested. Thus your concern about "one registry
> enforcing its rules on another registry" is also misguided. Besides I am sure
> you are really more concerned about registrars enforcing their rules.
> Registries, by their very nature, are essentially independent unless there are
> multiple registries for a single domain (I can't think of such a case or why
> you would want it so but in such a situation we would be right there with you
> arguing for independence of commercial operations between the registries).
> 
> As for CoRE (you refer to gTLD) and their SRS please don't overlook the fact
> that Melbourne IT is a founding member of CoRE. We have invested our own time,
> money, effort and resources in realising a basically policy-free set of TLDs
> and making them available to all Australians. What's more Melbourne IT is not
> alone in this as there are three other Australian companies who have had the
> guts, foresight and determination to be key players in this international
> initiative. Think about it! 88 companies world wide have voted with their
> dollars and time to support increased competition and freedom of choice in
> domain names.  I am surprised that, with his passion, Vic has not had CIA play
> a more prominent role in this initiative.
> 
> A very few people, like Vic, have not been happy with their dealings with
> Melbourne IT and for that we are truly sorry. However, we understand that we
> cannot serve every customer the way they think things should be done (ever
> tried getting VicRoads, the registrar of marriage licenses or even your local
> council dog license registry to do things your way not theirs?).
> 
> The rules and guidelines used by Melbourne IT as a registrar for com.au are
> the result of industry consultation and negotiation with the com.au licensor.
> Our license binds us to accept and follow those rules to maintain the value
> and recognition afforded one of the fastest growing domains in the world.
> Growing faster than .com, com.au ranks number seven in the world by population
> of domain names and is the second largest country specific SLD after co.uk.
> Our commitment to fair treatment for all is absolute but that doesn't mean we
> will cave-in to every critic who thinks the system under which we are licensed
> is unfair to them.
> 
> I hope this posting has clarified these critical points and that this
> readership will not be distracted in the future by continued misinformation.
> Anyone with specific questions is invited to contact me directly or via this
> forum. Thank you for your patience and your time.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Jordan
> 
> _______________________________________
> Jordan Green
> Commercial Manager - gTLD
> Melbourne IT
> 207 Bouverie Street, Carlton, 3053  AUSTRALIA
> Tel: +61.3.9344-9297        Fax: +61.3.9347-9473
> E-mail:  jordan&#167;melbourneit.com.au
> URL:    http://www.melbourneit.com.au
> _______________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> >From: Deus Ex Machina <vicc&#167;cia.com.au>
> >Subject: DNS: SRS mechanism
> >To: dns&#167;iia.net.au
> >Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 00:40:12 +1100 (EST)
> >Sender: owner-dns&#167;magna.com.au
> >Reply-To: dns&#167;iia.net.au
> >
> >
> >given that the current unhealthy situation with domain names
> >is to be rectified and that a shared registry system is to be
> >implemented. the shared registry sytem must be worked out in
> >such a way that will be fair to new registries. MITs initial
> >reponce to me was to go away as they werent about to give any help
> >to any newcommers. I think this is a very poor attitude from MIT.
> >
> >neither do I think implementing any new domains under .au prior to
> >competition can be seen as anything but self serving. so
> >just how many domains have MIT served out in the last year?
> >
> >the prefered option would be to have the .com.au zone file
> >under the control of a neutral party to ensure that updates
> >are carried out promptly and that applications are not accidently
> >delaid to the bias of any perticular registry.
> >
> >nor can we have one registry enforcing its rules on another registry.
> >the keeper of the zone files must be completly rule free in this regard
> >and allow all incoming updates that dont break lexical/syntactic rules.
> >
> >gTLD have a shared registry system, if it hasnt been sunk yet.
> >perhaps this could be used, or at least provide some experience
> >towards building one. either way bulding one doesnt sound like
> >a hard problem.
> >
> >speaking of gTLD I am also shocked and alarmed that MIT is selling
> >and encouraging people to bid for these domains given the real
> >possibility that the system will not go ahead. nowhere in the blurb
> >I was sent is there anything that says what the refund policy is,
> >or the fact gTLD had a very real chance of not happening.
> >this is disgraceful business practice.
> >
> >Vic
> >
> >
> 
> 
======================================
Regards
Ian Whitbourn
Director, Consumer & Commercial
Cyberspace Corporation P/L

Email:  ianw&#167;cyberspace.net.au
WWW:  http://www.cyberspace.net.au
Phone:  (03) 9887 4700
Fax:    (03) 9887 2756
======================================