RE: [DNS] The .pro name space.

RE: [DNS] The .pro name space.

From: Mark Hughes <effectivebusiness§applications.com.au>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 00:35:28 +1000
> My understanding is that auDA have considered the state of the .AU
> namespace along with all received proposals for new 2LDs and decided
> that at this time there is no need for further 2LDs within .AU.

That is incorrect.  auDA did not decide "that at this time there is no need
for further 2LDs within .AU."



The New Names Advisory Panel (see
http://www.auda.org.au/policy/panel-newname-2002/) reviewed a number of
submissions for the creation of new 2LDs within .au.  Based on the
submissions received, and extensive periods of public consultation, the
Panel recommended:

* Creation of 8 new 2LDs for geographic use - i.e. nsw.au, qld.au, vic.au,
tas.au, sa.au, wa.au, act.au, and nt.au.
* conf.au be re-activated



No decision was made that "there is no need for further 2LDs within .AU".
In fact, the New Names Advisory Panel developed a process by proposals for
new 2LDs could be considered, and anyone can submit a proposal for a new 2LD
by following that process - see
http://www.auda.org.au/policy/panel-newname-2002/process-final.pdf.



Whether a new 2LD is created or not depends on a number of factors
including:

* whether the new 2LD would be of significant benefit to the Australian
internet community
* whether the details for the new 2LD are in accordance with existing policy
* if there is widespread support for the proposed new 2LD



If you read the submissions reviewed by the New Names Advisory Panel, you'll
see that almost all of them had one or more relatively 'fatal' flaws, such
as:

* They were sketchy half page 'back of envelope' submissions with not enough
details included for an serious evaluation
* They proposed things that directly contradicted existing .au policy
* They appeared to be for the purpose of 'enhancing the legitimacy of the
proposing entity', rather than for 'providing a benefit to the Australian
internet community'
* They included supporting arguments that were wrong in fact, inherently
contradictory, and/or irrelevant to the proposal






Regards, Mark

Mark Hughes
Effective Business Applications Pty Ltd
+61 4 1374 3959
www.pplications.com.au
effectivebusiness&#167;applications.com.au
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:07 UTC