You, David Keegel, shaped the electrons to say:
 
 
+To be fair to Melbourne IT, it was suggested (I think at the DNS meeting
+in Melbourne) that the reason for Melbourne IT wanting to enter into the
+agreements with Participating ISPs was so that Melbourne IT could minimise
+the financial overheads they would incur.

Maximum profit, minimum cost, not even a worthy service.... yet
 
+Note that the Participating ISPs, despite the name, could be any agent
+willing to fill the role regardless of whether they supply Internet
+access to anybody.

Im not sure if I could afford or want the insurance they insist on... for
$10,000,000...

+Larger ISPs will already have this sort of administrative infrastructure
+in place so that they can bill clients for Internet Services, so one would
+hope they could do the same thing for their customers as above (add a small
+margin for processing and risk, but allow flexibility in payment terms).

but us smaller ones can get stuffed right?
 
+By all means attack Melbourne IT for the level of charges they propose for
+domain renewals, especially if they are going to have a monopoly.  But let's
+not get distracted from the issues by whinges about payment methods please.

why? its an important issue. I dont have a credit card.

but now they accept company cheques.. so im happy and now it doesnt bother me.
Another problem out of the way.

a few more weeks and we will have a decent registry maybe... if they listen to
us.


 -------------------------------------------------------------------
| Skeeve Stevens - MyInternet  personal.url: http://www.skeeve.net/ |
| email://skeeve§skeeve.net/   work.url: http://www.myinternet.net/ | 
| phone://612.9869.3334/       mobile://0414.SKEEVE/      [753-383] |
 -------------------------------------------------------------------