Cate,

The Board of auDA was and is fully informed. At a board meeting earlier this
year or late last year a plan of action in respect to the re-delegation was
agreed by the board. It was not a resolution of the board as such is not
necessary. It is however quite correct to say that the Board agreed to the
plan and therefore supports it. If you are suggesting that this matter has
been undertaken by the executive without the approval of the board then you
are wrong. If you are suggesting something else then I am missing your
point.

As for the absence of documentation, as I have already explained, the
documents will be posted on the site as soon as I return to Australia. It
would have been and still is inappropriate to post the documents until
receipt of them has been received form IANA. They are, after all addressed
to IANA and I have no wish to pre-empt anything by posting them on our web
site until I know that they have been viewed by the recipient.

Regards

Chris Disspain
CEO - auDA
ceo§auda.org.au
+61-3-9226-9495
www.auda.org.au


-----Original Message-----
From: Cate Coorey [mailto:catecoorey§bigpond.com]
Sent: Thursday, 7 June 2001 13:15
To: dns§waia.asn.au
Subject: [DNS] re-delegation of .au

Greg Watson said
>Cate,
>The auDA board fully supports the process that is being undertaken to
>effect the transfer of delegation for .au.

Generally, as I understand corporate rules such a comment would require
some evidence that the board has met, discussed and passed a resolution of
some sort. Do you mean to say "All members of the auDA board, representing
the various stake holder groups have been polled on the process being
undertaken and have voted to support it."
I am beginning to suspect not, such a pity as all the good work done by
auDA amounts to a hill of beans ( IMHO ) if this final process is not
undertaken with integrity, transparency and accountability. Surly the
appropriateness of any re-delegation would hinge on auDA's ability to give
confidence to the au Internet community that
it is able to "do a equitable, just, honest, and competent job". The
confusion (in my mind) re the process being followed is not aided by
absence of any information on the auDA web site. Having to rely on media
clips seems odd, not posting information until you have confirmation the
IANA has received the request lacks credibility since auDA has apparently
(according to the press) met with ICANN re the issue.

>  In view of this it is our intention to proceed with the redelegation as
> outlined by Chris.

Chris has done nothing to outline any process. He said a "formal process
was being followed" then declined outline it until he has had a chance
(oops, a second chance) to present it to the media.

Disappointed, but will be delighted to be proven wrong.

Respectfully yours,

Cate Coorey

--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 372 subscribers.
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request§auda.org.au to be removed.