Re: [DNS] New Domain Level - Debate

Re: [DNS] New Domain Level - Debate

From: Simon Hackett <simon§>
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2000 08:14:16 +0930
Easier, surely, to just modify the policy on to straight 
first-come, first-served.

I would suggest that this might be inevitable once competition is 
finally, at last, eventually, not a minute too soon, allowed to 
happen in the domain name space, depending of course on the 
extent to which the existing registrar is prepared to cooperate with 
the agreed processes in this respect (and I live in hope, although I 
don't know why).

The problem with '' is that it would add huge confusion to the 
existing situation where, like it or not, people kinda-understand 
that is the Australian realm version of .com

Our understandings, here on this list, about allocation policies will 
never become publically understood. The public's entire interaction 
with the allocation system is likely to be limited, in general, to 'I 
want my name, and I want it now' - nothing to do with policy, 
everything to do with demand.

I'll also note that I tried to introduce such a proposal, oh about 
five years ago now, called (deliberately different to 
to avoid confusion between the two, which is what your suggestion may 
tend to cause, I'm afraid).

Nothing happened. The processes in place to allow a new subdomain of 
.au were insufficiently formed to allow anyone to even consider the 
proposal (even though it was formulated in accordance with the 
'rules' at the time), and, quite literally, nothing happened. Nothing 
at all.

I predict the same outcome in the case of your suggestion at this 
time too. The only way to be able to achieve change in this respect 
or in respect of the allocation policy in is for auDA to be 
able to achieve workable practical control of the problem space, and 
then start doing things within in. Everything else degenerates to 
'wouldn't it be nice if...' and then dies. Trust me on this.


>I have private emailed to another member of this forum and am happy to
>share this thought for deliberation.
>The .com .net .org domains and others do differ from how Australia
>has done ours. In the forementioned you do not neccessarily have to own a
>business name to enable the registration of the chosen domain - old news.
>There is good and bad in this method of processing, naturally.
>I see that there may be room to 'have your cake and eat it too' by
>introducing another 'level' of domain within Australia that allows
>'open-market' processes as is done in other countries such as the UK.
>By introducing a new level, such as '', a number of issues may
>be solved, yet it would depend on how it is packaged and differenciated to
>the market.
>1 - remains positioned as a 'registered' Aust business/company level.
>2 - to be more open-market oriented.
>	- cheaper to purchase.
>	- no restrictions on naming policies.
>	- 3-4 companies to sell domain names (hence competition)
>	- domain names to be freely traded/auctioned.
>Now, before you right back (if you chose to) I know that some may have
>strong views against and I know that there are some holes in the
>forementioned. There may be some that may wish to add to the model too, so
>go for it.
>This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
>express permission of the author.  You don't know who really wrote it.
>289 subscribers. Archived at (dns/dns)
>Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167; to be removed.

Simon Hackett, Technical Director, Internode Systems Pty Ltd
31 York St [PO Box 284, Rundle Mall], Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: simon&#167;  Web:
Phone: +61-8-8223-2999          Fax: +61-8-8223-1777
Received on Sun Apr 09 2000 - 06:52:44 UTC

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