> 
> The registry had a bug, a very obscure bug, it took a little while to 
> identify, and a little while longer to get it fixed. It was not 20 
> hours, it was just over 3 business hours.
> 
> Specifically because it is a very important system, you cannot have 
> people doing bug fixes on the fly, and certain procedures have to be 
> followed.
> 
> The turnaround time is actually quite fast, you certainly 
> would not get 
> anywhere near that sort of response from VeriSign, Neulevel, Afilias 
> etc, and I can guarantee you that their systems do still have 
> similar bugs.
> 

Agreed.  There is a difference between resolving a routine customer
service issue, and resolving a systematic software error.

Fixing a software error requires:
- identification of software problem  (often hard when the system
involves multiple parties)
- design and documentation of fix
- testing of not only the fix (functional test) but also any impact on
the rest of the software (regression testing)

The quality of an organisation is often measured by how carefully the
above procedure is followed.  

With respect to a specific problem - a short term fix of the symptom may
have been possible (e.g direct editing of the registry database), but
the overall identification of the cause is important.   Short term fixes
can create their own problems (e.g fixing something in one place but not
another, and creating inconsistencies).

Part of the cost of a domain name (whether by registry or registrar)
goes towards ensuring reliable systems (e.g redundant equipment, and
rigoruous software development methodologies).  

Regards,
Bruce