Personally I think only a very few things in this area are without contention:

	1) the process needs to show consensus. Right now, it can't.

	2) it has to be not-for-profit. 

I add a few others which I personally believe, and I think some other people
believe, but I sometimes doubt the current ADNA backers have taken on board:
	
	3) it has to be formally delegated down from the IANA.
	
	4) it needs to be at LEAST as good as the current KRE delegation (hard)

	5) At the 2LD, DNS is not about commercial viability or what the 
	   business sector think is in THEIR best interests. Its about what
	   is in the best interests of the wider community, with regard to
	   a common infrastructure.

Putting .AU "on a sound commercial footing" is not neccessarily one of these
goals. Making it lawsuit-proof might be. Frankly, I'd rather it was 'right'
than legally watertight. In that respect, what KRE does shows a remarkably
high amount of common sense. The last thing we need is a botched replacement.

Please don't lets mistake what was the right outcome for .COM.AU (and the
process which lead to it) for the right outcome for all 2LD under .AU.

-George
--
George Michaelson         |  connect.com.au pty/ltd
Email: ggm§connect.com.au |  c/o AAPT,
Phone: +61 7 3834 9976    |  level 8, the Riverside Centre,
  Fax: +61 7 3834 9908    |  123 Eagle St, Brisbane QLD 4000