Hello Don,

This is something that was, very unfortunately, always going to happen. I
know I've been very vocal and virulent about "that situation" from the day I
became a member of this list, but that was  driven purely through a sense of
outrage and moreover concern as to how such a decision (to allow a market
player to host the data) could have been made in the first place.
To AUDA's credit they have reacted, sadly , it has been just that. A
reaction.

We are now facing another situation with similar long term ramifications,
should we fail to get things right.
A Code of Practice.

So far after having attended the meeting on Friday, 3 weeks ago, I can see
that we are in for a dose of the " More of the sames," unless we are very
careful.  The draft currently being developed is merely a list of guidelines
crossed with a few warnings. Our Industry clearly needs a firm set of laws
and rules as we have an over-abundance of individuals who prefer
interpretations and "so-forth".

Laws can be enforced, albeit with difficulty 'against' litigation: warm and
fuzzy guidelines simply get smashed.

Michael Verga



-----Original Message-----
From: Don Cameron [mailto:donc§mudgeeab.com.au]
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2001 12:23 PM
To: dns§auda.org.au
Subject: Re: [DNS] auDA dumps NetRegistry claiming "security breach"


>> "Essentially we agreed to host AUNIC for free, so the only way to make it
commercially viable from our point of view was to access the information
contained on the database and use it in reports and so fourth," Donovan
said. "They disagreed that we should have been doing that and terminated the
agreement." (snip)

Is this a true quote? - I can't believe that a company as (reputedly)
professional as NetRegistry would risk losing so much for the sake of a
small green ledger entry. Surely the kudos and ability to market themselves
as the AUNIC hosts would have been worth far more in future sales and
reputation than any short-term gains sought by accessing the database (an
action that was always going to be open to issues of privacy etc.).

Plus this comment (if made) surely leads a lot of people to now question the
definition of 'so forth'... what else was Netregistry using our personal
information for? - I for one would be very interested to know what Mr
Donovan defines 'so forth' as being.

Rgds, Don Cameron


--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 314 subscribers.
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request§auda.org.au to be removed.


--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 313 subscribers. 
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request§auda.org.au to be removed.