[oops - wrong shortcut.damn you outlook.sorry.let me start again]

 

I was recently back in Australia for a couple of weeks (I've been living in
the UK for a bit over four years) and a couple of things struck me for the
first time that I think are of relevance to this debate.

 

Everytime I heard ".com.au", what I really heard was ".com" and not ".au".

 

I also wondered, out loud, why the Victorian Health Department's domain name
is www.vichealth.vic.gov.au , and not www.vichealth.gov.au
<http://www.vichealth.gov.au/>  or even, www.vichealth.au
<http://www.vichealth.au/>  (not strictly relevant as it falls outside
auDA's remit, but it's the same issue).

 

Which started me thinking, wouldn't we be better off with second level
registrations, ie domainname.au, something that I have to admit, had never
really occurred to me before.

 

Does anyone remember a few Victorian election campaigns ago, when the Libs'
ad agency created a website for Jeff Kennett, at: www.jeff.com.au
<http://www.jeff.com.au/> ? Well if you do, you'll also remember that the
media (bless them) reported it as www.jeff.com <http://www.jeff.com/> , much
to the bemusement of the unsuspecting American who had registered jeff.com,
who was all of a sudden hit by massive data transfer charges by his ISP for
all the new traffic he was experiencing as a result.

 

I can also provide another almost identical example, when I received a
panicked phone call from someone who is a current auDA board member that had
just released a major new website for their organisation, using a .com.au
domain name.  True to form, the media left off the ".au" because all they
heard was the ".com".  Naturally, I helped him register the ".com" version
on the spot (thankfully it was available) and the problem was solved.

 

Which, I think begs the question.just because a reclusive computer scientist
that happened to be working on the right project at the right time decided
that we need registrations in the third level under .au, isn't in and of
itself, a valid reason to continue doing so.

 

But, it would be equally valid to argue that the onus of proof lies on those
that propose change to the status quo, and I would agree.  

 

So, to answer Mr Disspain's request for "evidence of a demand to change the
policy", I have created a survey, accessible at:
http://gs-survey.com/s.asp?s=1436  

 

I will publish results at www.dotausurvey.info
<http://www.dotausurvey.info/>  and to this list (why didn't I use a .au
domain name?  Well it's simply too hard.).  I will also filter IP addresses
to preclude more than 1 response from one IP range, with the exception of
major ISPs to ensure that vested interests don't stack the results.  Feel
free to pass this on to any parties that you think are interested.

 

If anyone has any major objections to the content or nature of my questions,
let me know as I can change them with a few clicks.

 

Jon

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.cynosure.com.au/mailman/private/dns/attachments/20060608/647adf90/attachment.htm