DNS: Re: DNA Selection Criteria V3.1

DNS: Re: DNA Selection Criteria V3.1

From: <mark.hughes§ccamatil.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 22:00:26 EDT
Peter wrote:
>I need to reiterate my earlier statement that Melbourne IT insists
>on fair and equable treatment by ADNA in developing policies for
>commercial DNAs. We will not accept the introduction of multiple
>DNAs in com.au alone (as distinct from multiple DNAs in all
>relevant commercial 2LDs), and especially not in the absence of any
>policy that will simultaneously grow the .au market by introducing
>additional 2LDs in response to customer needs. Just because we are
>the only commercial DNA currently working within ADNA to create a
>stable framework for the industry, does not mean that we are
>prepared to accept 'lowest common factor' policies that target
>com.au simply because other DNAs are yet to co-operate.

Peter, I agree that Melbourne IT should have 'fair and equable
treatment' from ADNA.  I'm not sure I understand exactly what it is
you would would like.  May I try and state it and you correct me if
I'm wrong?  Is this the issue:

"If there are two commercial 2LDs in operation, then it is
inequitable for one of the 2LDs to have multiple DNAs who must
compete, while the other 2LD is managed by one DNA who does not have

>Secondly, concerning the detail of your recommendations, I point
>out that Melbourne IT has a five-year contract as DNA for com.au,
>and we are not prepared to forgo this agreement without adequate
>financial compensation.

And I don't blame you, either.  If you've got a five year contract
then you've been able to plan expenditure and investment based on
that assumption and should not be disadvantaged by the new ADNA
policies.  My suggestion is that ADNA recognises the existing
contract arrangement in a 'grandfather' clause.  How about we add a
line to the first paragraph of the .com.au policy document so it now

"The .com.au domain is intended for commercial for-profit
organisations and is administered by one or more DNAs.  ADNA offers
non-exclusive licenses to organisations who are DNAs in the .com.au
2LD.  Licenses are initially granted subject to the DNA meeting the
'Criteria for New .com.au DNAs' and are automatically renewed
annually subject to the DNA continuing to meet the 'Criteria for
Annual License Renewal for .com.au DNAs'.  Licenses are valid for
one year or part thereof, starting on 1 July and ending on 30 June.
Melbourne IT currently has a license as .com.au DNA that expires on
30 June 2001 and will thereafter be renewed on the same basis as
other .com.au DNAs."

BTW, how many commercial 2LDs are currently operating in .au?  Is
.net.au considered to be a 'commercial 2LD' by the internet
community;  by the .net.au DNA?   Simon?

Regards, Mark

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*  Message From : HUGHES, MARK          *
*  Location     : AUSTRALIA-CCA HDQ     *
*  KOMAIL ID    : N17503  (CCAMCQN1)    *
*  Date and Time: 08/05/97  11:58:42    *
 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Received on Tue Aug 05 1997 - 12:20:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:02 UTC