Hi Vic,

>as chris reminded us during the conference auda is not there to benefit registrars and by that token neither is auda >there to
hinder registrars.

Agreed sort of. It's certainly not there to hinder registrars. But I would argue that benefit to registrars is something that does
get taken into account when examining policy matters etc.

>since registrars loses and costs have no impact on policy, then likewise registrar gains should have no impact on >policy
whatsoever.

No. Both have an impact. It is clearly relevant to policy making what the impact is on registrars from a costs point of view. It's
not the only factor but it is one of the factors. So, for example, if there was a demand for more stringent policy from members of
the public we would consider the effect of that on registrars ability to do their job and to remain in business.

> the only fact that is worth discussing is: does a demand exist for xyz.au?

No that's one thing worth discussing not the only thing. 

> the answer is overwhelmingly yes.

Really. On what do you base that assertion? Research? 

Cheers,

Chris Disspain
CEO - auDA
ceo§auda.org.au
www.auda.org.au
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dns-bounces+ceo=auda.org.au§dotau.org [mailto:dns-bounces+ceo=auda.org.au§dotau.org] On Behalf Of
> Vic Cinc
> Sent: Thursday, 8 June 2006 13:30
> To: .au DNS Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [DNS] Domain dispute heats up
> 
> Edwin Groothuis [edwin§mavetju.org] wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 01:01:01PM +1000, Vic Cinc wrote:
> > > at the recent auda conference, registrars overwhelmingly voted for
> > > opening the up top level .au space for registration. again I think
> > > many cctlds have done this and the sky hasnt fallen in.
> >
> > They're not the smartest cookies these registrars...
> >
> > Are you saying they like to be able to sell only one virtual item
> > (after all, the domain name business is nothing more than a wind
> > trade. It doesn't cost anything to produce), instead of N virtual
> > items?
> >
> > Specially with the fear campaign of "protecting your IP", big
> > businesses which have a lot to lose will register foo.com.au,
> > foo.bar.au and foo.org.au. That is *three* sells instead of one
> > sell. Once it is possible to register under .au, nobody will register
> > under com.au anymore.
> 
> if registrars stand to gain or not is irrelavent to policy.
> 
> as chris reminded us during the conference auda is not there to benefit
> registrars and by that token neither is auda there to hinder registrars.
> 
> since registrars loses and costs have no impact on policy, then
> likewise registrar gains should have no impact on policy whatsoever.
> 
> the only fact that is worth discussing is: does a demand exist for xyz.au?
> 
> the answer is overwhelmingly yes
> 
> > Can you name me one country, besides the .us domain which smarty
> > chose state.us, which moved from a similar naming system as there
> > is in Japan, the UK, Australia, Korea etc to a toplevel one?
> 
> france, italy, germany come to mind, there are plenty of others I am sure.
> 
> Vic
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/