Re: DNS: Suggested ADNA Board Members

Re: DNS: Suggested ADNA Board Members

From: Adam Todd <at§>
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 1998 10:56:27 +1000
>> Corporations Law breaches are pretty serious.  Especially where this kind
>> of representation is concerned.
>That's the third time you've stated that ADNA baord members are potentially
>breaching the corporations law.  The ACCC has had an observer at every one
>of the ADNA meetings, as far as I am aware.  If you believe that a breach
>has been committed, then why don't you go talk to them.

Nope, I said - Corporation Law Breaches are pretty Serious.  I didn't say
"ADNA  Members Breach the Corporations Law."

Please, don't twist my words. I generally select them very carefully.

>All you have done is criticise, pontificate and make inane accusations.  The

And at the reuqest of two ADNA members (one now no longer) submitted a list
of names to which was claimed to be worthless.

Obviously the names weren't read.  I'd be very careful calling at least one
of the names "worthless".

>reality is that the people who are in ADNA (and others, particular several
>from ISOC-AU) have put in a lot of their own time, effort and money to date.

Yes, to ensure that they make more money from less time in the future.
They also claim to represent the Internet Community, yet only less than 75%
of 200 ISP's even knew who they were.  Only 19% were in support.

That is very scary.

>At least they've made some effort and done some work.  

So have I.  I submitted as requested a list of names.  I'm Damned if I do
and I'm damned if I don't.  Time to start acting professional guys.  I have
all year.  I get paid to sit here and write email all day.

>I disagree with several of the ADNA's actions.

That's a start.

>At two meetings, I have motioned
>that non voting members (ie: registrars, including myself and Peter Gerrand)
>should not be on the board, but this hasn't even appeared in the minutes.

Great.  An organisation claiming integrity and can't even document it's


There.  That solves that problem.  Should I make my demand via the
Corporatiosn Law, I'm sure I can find a way in.

>believe that the requirements to become a registry should be minimal, and
>implementing shared registries in .AU 2LD's should be a first priority,
>any new 2LD's are created.

Yes, you have stated this before, but ADNA has along way to go before it
starts working out what is necessary to become a registry.  There are
organisations who have been doing REgistry type processes for longer than
ADNA members have been ISP's - or even knew what a modem was.

>But as another board member has pointed out to me, I will have more of an
>on these policies by remaining with ADNA than by quitting, or standing on the
>outside throwing darts.

I doubt that to be honest.  6 against one isn't very promising.

Especially if the other members DON'T want competition.

Michael, you may just be the only ethical person on the board.  I'm not sure.

      The world operates 24 hours a day ... so do the servers.
The advice offered in this email is not considered professional advice,
or it would be accompanied by an invoice. No permission is granted for 
republication of comments, without written consent.
Business Development, Technology Domain Registration and Network Advisory
Telstra Convery Member
Adam Todd                                 Personal  
Phone +61 2 9729 0565                     Network
AU Root Server Confederation    
AU Internet News  mailto:internet-request&#167;  with "subscribe"
Received on Tue Mar 03 1998 - 11:38:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:03 UTC