Thank your for the opportunity to comment.
     
     I'd support the creation of the proposed registry and, broadly, the 
     proposed guidelines for its administration and functioning.
     
     Re - possible disaster scenarios, I would suggest that the more 
     commercialised nature of the registry compared to existing registries 
     warrants provision for wider disaster scenarios - 
     
     eg 1: either delegated authority (iiNet or Internode) becomes 
     *unwilling* to continue to provide their service, possibly as a result 
     of sale or takeover.  I'm not sure if this would be materially 
     different from "unable", and maybe should be investigated further.
     
     eg 2: *both* parties may become "unable to manage registrations" - it 
     would seem consideration should be given to ultimate support / 
     continuation, possibly by ISOC-AU (on a strictly holding, non-profit 
     basis ?) or likewise by MelbourneIT (subject to their willingness ?) 
     until expressions of interest/a public auction in the registry can be 
     called.
     
     Also, is this new registry to be 'given away' to the proposed DA's ?  
     Will iiNet or Internode be putting anything back into the Internet, 
     other than more choice of domain name, in exchange for the opportunity 
     to make money from it ?  Is wider choice considered sufficient return ? 
     Forgive my lack of knowledge of the history of the proposal - while 
     Geoff Huston's document was on the INTIAA site, I couldn't see anything 
     on who chose iiNet + Internode, nor why. Are other interested parties 
     being given sufficient chance to bid agaist the proposed initial 
     administrators, or is it only open to INTIAA members ?  Has there been 
     a pulic call for expressions of interest ?  Isn't this the basis of 
     competition. ?
     
     Although a latecomer to this list, I've seen no evidence of wider 
     debate on some of these issues.
     
     Further, the procedure (for widening / narrowing the DA's ?) after the 
     initial 18 months should be included in the proposal document and 
     eventual domain policies etc document so that it is all in the public 
     domain and convenient, so that potential registerees can make fully 
     informed decisions about domains.
     
     
     Craig Morony
     Guava Interactive Pty Ltd
     (a member of the Blackie McDOnald Communications Group)
     
     cmorony§bmcd.com.au
     +61-2-9929 0232
     
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: INET: Proposed BIZ.AU Registry
Author:  Michael Malone <pariah&#167;creole.iinet.net.au> at Internet 
Date:    3/12/96 1:13 PM
     
     
     
Followups to dns&#167;intiaa.asn.au please.
     
     
     
            Proposed Australian BIZ.AU Registry
     
     
Summary
-------
     
It is proposed that a registry for BIZ.AU, intended for 
all Australian businesses, be established under the 
proposed guidelines of the DNS Summit.
     
Public comment is invited.
     
     
        ..(deleted)..
     
Disaster
--------
     
It should be noted that both Internode and iiNet are stable 
organisations established in 1991 and 1993 respectively. However:
     
In the event that iiNet becomes unable to manage registrations 
within BIZ.AU, Internode agrees to assume iiNet's BIZ.AU client 
base and existing contracts at no additional cost to clients, 
excepting that owed to iiNet.
     
In the event that Internode becomes unable to manage registrations 
within BIZ.AU, iiNet agrees to assume Internode's BIZ.AU client 
base and existing contracts at no additional cost to clients, 
excepting that owed to Internode.
     
     
     (deleted)..