Geoff Huston wrote:
> 
> I simply cannot let this one go past to the keeper...
> 
> I've still got 4 outstanding questions addresses to Melbourne IT - I
> note the slicence has been impressive but hardly illuminating.
> 
> Before I respond to this let me make one very simple point.
> 
> Trust cannot be purchased, nor can trust be instilled by
> administrative fiat. Trust is the result of being open with those you
> deal with.  For as long as Melbourne IT operates com.au exclusively,
> and while it does so in a way which admits no public disclosure of the
> fate of the funds collected via this activity, then trust is a very
> scant resource which I don't see much evidence of, nor do I have high
> expectation thereof.
> 
Geoff
I received this follow-up message AFTER sending my detailed response to
your 4 questions earlier this morning.
Please recognise that while your policy questions are of high importance
to you (and others), we have been and remain flat out in providing the
COM.AU bureau service, including responding to a huge number of
telephoned and e-mailed questions from customers about their particular
concerns. 
As a matter of policy, we are giving higher priority to dealing with
customer requests than to dealing with the industry regulatory issues
you are quite reasonably trying to resolve. Our customers must come
first. 

So please stop misconstruing my delay in responding to your message as
any lack of "open[ness]" or lack of "trust[worthiness]". It isn't worthy
of you.
  
> But what I wanted to do was respond to Andrew's message regarding the
> AUNIC statment in the responses AUNIC generates - the AUNIC services
> ARE PROVIDED FREE OF END USER CHARGE.  The fact that we have managed
> to do this to date in spite of massive increase in transaction levels
> is a result of the committed support of Telstra and a dedicated effort
> of myself and Paul at the AUNIC to automate as much as possible while
> maintaining the integrity of the registration service. I think it
> quite reasonable that we inform clients of the registry service that
> we can continue to provide this service without charge to them.
> 
> Indeed I do not see it as an "unfortunate misunderstanding" that we
> are undertaking our public contribution to the administrative
> infrastructure of the Internet here in Australia by operating this
> service. Quite the reverse. And I believe we are entitled to inform
> the clients of this registry service that this is a service which is
> operated without charge to them.

Again you are being a tad hypersensitive. We at Melbourne IT are
delighted that you and Paul at Telstra provide the AUNIC registry
service free of charge, and you have every reason to advertise the fact;
Andrew is pointing out that some of our mutual customers are confusing
the AUNIC statement 
	"There is no charge for this registration service.
	  Thank you"
as applying to the total COM.AU registration service, for which there
obviously IS a charge.
We would simply like you to amend the phrase to e.g.  "There is no
charge for the AUNIC registration service.
	  Thank you"
- or something similar.

I hope we can get back to our normal friendly, trustful and open
relationship!
Peter

-- 
Professor Peter Gerrand
CEO, Melbourne IT
Level 3, 207 Bouverie St
CARLTON Vic. 3053 Australia
Tel. +61 3 9344 9300
Fax. +61 3 9347 9473
Email: ceo§MelbourneIT.com.au
Home page: http://www.MelbourneIT.com.au/