Bruce,

Appreciate your professionalism. Perhaps the auDA CEO could take a
leaf out of your book when responding to queries instead of being so
blantantly dismissive. The act in itself raises questions.

Silence regarding particlar issues certainly raises questions;

Regarding a matter affecting the Australian public - one of deception.
Rather odd that greater emphasis was placed on the writer's indentity
and attitude rather than the issue at hand. 

Posted last week by Dominic Main 

Dear auDa,

Please go to http://www.au.com/about.html 

On this page NetRegistry blatantly lie to the Australian public
claiming crap.au.com domains are top level domains just like .com and
.net
CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS?
Under "What is a domain name?" third paragraph:

There are many 'top level domains', such as .au.com, .com, .org,
.co.nz, .edu.au, .net.au, all of which signify different things - for
example, .edu.au would be the domain ending for an educational
institution in Australia.au.com is an international address, but
located within Australia. 






Original message from: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin&#167;melbourneit.com.au>
>
>Hello Harry,
>
>The relevant section in the Names Panel
>(http://www.auda.org.au/panel/name/papers/finalreport.html report is:
>
>**************
>
>" 4.1 Generic domain names
>
>Generic domain names are prohibited in com.au, but are allowed in all
other
>2LDs. The Panel noted that if the prohibition on generic domain names
were
>to be maintained in com.au, then for the sake of consistency it
should be
>extended to other 2LDs too (or at the very least, to the other
commercial
>2LD, net.au). 
>
>
>There is consensus among the Panel that the restriction on generic
domain
>names should be removed in some way, to meet public demand. However,
there
>is no consensus about how or when the restriction should be removed.
Some
>Panel members favoured maintaining the prohibition in com.au, but
creating
>new 2LDs that would use generic names as gateways or portals (eg.
cars.au,
>lawyers.au, etc), or new 2LDs that would allow generic domain names
to be
>licensed as third level domains (3LDs). Other Panel members favoured
>removing the prohibition in com.au, in addition to the new 2LD
options.
>
>
>The Panel has decided to refer this issue to the auDA Board. If the
Board
>decides to remove the prohibition on generic domain names in com.au,
a
>discussion paper prepared by a sub-group of the Panel at Attachment B
>recommends the auction method of allocation. Note that this
recommendation
>was put forward by the authors of the paper; it does not necessarily
reflect
>the views of the whole Panel. If the Board decides to maintain the
>restriction on generic domain names, then the Panel suggests that the
>reserved list mechanism in recommendation 3.7 would be the best way
to do
>this. "
>
>
>********************
>
>Thus the panel reached consensus that the restriction on generic
names
>should be removed, but could not reach consensus on how that should
be done.
>
>A subgroup of the panel (3 people: Alan Chalmers, ACA, Ian Johnston,
SETEL,
>and Derek Whitehead, Swinburne) made a proposal (in Attachment B) to
auction
>the generic names.
>
>However there were other submissions to the Names Panel reports that
>proposed other approaches (e.g
>http://www.auda.org.au/panel/name/submissions/tonkin2.html).
>
>The auDA Board seems to have made a decision to use the proposal from
the
>subgroup (based on their press release of
>(http://www.auda.org.au/docs/new-domains.html), although the minutes
of the
>relevant Board meeting have yet to be posted.  The last Board minutes
posted
>on the website are May 2001.
>
>The auctioning of generic names is certainly one approach to
allocating
>generic names, and it also has the advantage of providing some
funding to
>help auDA manage the process of running a tender for the ".au" and
second
>level domain registries.  However I would like to have seen some
industry
>consensus (or at least majority support) reached on this issue with
more
>public comment - rather than the Board just accepting a proposal from
3
>people instead of the panel as a whole.  
>
>Note that auDA is an Australian self regulatory policy body, and
should
>normally be driven by the outcomes of the Advisory Panels
>(http://www.auda.org.au/panel.html) which include broad participation
from
>both industry participants and consumers.  I am less concerned about
the
>method chosen for allocating generic domain names, then I am about
the
>process used to make the decision.
>
>I hope at least the details of how the auctioning process will work
will be
>put out for public comment, before implementation.  Implementing an
auction
>for several thousand generic domain names will not be simple.  e.g
Will the
>process be done manually by auDA, or will there be an open tender to
operate
>a system to automate the process?
>
>Regards,
>Bruce Tonkin
>
>--
>This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum
without
>express permission of the author. 337 subscribers. 
>Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass:
dns)
>Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167;auda.org.au to be removed.
>
>.
>



__________________________________________________________________
Get your free Australian email account at http://www.start.com.au

--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 337 subscribers. 
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167;auda.org.au to be removed.