Re: [DNS] Spring Clean (Reform) cont.

Re: [DNS] Spring Clean (Reform) cont.

From: David Keegel <djk§>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 23:39:58 +1000 (EST)
] Sorry to burden this list with my troubles but to keep you all posted my
] requested  ( has "NOT been undertaken".

I was thinking of mentioning earlier that in order to progress this
application for a domain name, you may need to get an explicit "no"
to the request.

The reason being that the policy basically says "this is for
Australian organisations which don't fit under any other category in
*.au".  (It is a common mis-conception that is purely intended
for Australian non-profit organisations.)

Now that ACFE has been explicitly rejected for an domain name,
it has a clear case for an domain name.  (Assuming of course
that ACFE is not an association, and that it is a "legal person".)

] At least the discussion resolved the sweeping under the carpet issue as I
] have  just recieved the message below.
] OK THE BIG QUESTION: I do not think that this is a just or sensible policy.
] It clearly  needs changing.  Who knows what is the process is to actually
] do this? Could anyone interested in having this policy changed or has
] information about how one could do this please drop me a line.

Here's your answer:
! From: gih&#167; (Geoff Huston)
! Subject: RE: [DNS] reply to Spring Clean comments
! Date: 25 Aug 1999 06:15:01 +1000
! >It's the policy for registration that needs a serious review.
! Precisely.
! I understand efforts are underway within the educational sector to do
! precisely that.

 David Keegel <djk&#167;>  URL:
Cybersource P/L: Unix Systems Administration and TCP/IP network management
Received on Wed Aug 25 1999 - 21:40:06 UTC

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