George Michaelson wrote:

> Please Leni. Not now. Can't you amend this to reflect current reality?

I have to second this.

I can really see CSIRO handing out their business plans.
With one per CRC (so a few hundred in total) and some
commercially sensitive - get real.

Similarly, personal delegation, the current method used
by edu.au, doesn't fit into the proposed model at all.

I strongly suggest that the proposal be limited to the
commercial domains.

For my reasons, see the objections collated on a single
pass through the document for non-commercial domains.
In short, significantly more work would have to be done
on the proposals to make them acceptable to the entire
.au domain.

Cheers,
glen


PS: I actually think the proposal is good (with some
    refinement) and shows a great deal of thought and
    work.  But non-commerical domains have a different
    world-view that the document doesn't even begin to
    consider.

In more detail, for non-comercial domains:
 - the "related parties" clause prohibits csiro.au's
   current mode of operation.
 - the sanctions clause is not acceptable.
 - the `board' nominating a `competitive domain' is not acceptable.
 - s2.2.1 on subdomain allocation is not practical for CSIRO
 - s2.2.3 is disallowed under the Privacy Act for some organsiations
 - the requirement to treat all customers consistently does not
   allow names of strategic or operational importance to leap the
   queue.  While fairness is desirable for some domains, it is
   not in others.
 - the word `agent' is defined in law and best avoided unless that
   meaning is required.
 - the complaints procedure is unacceptable for some non-profit or
   corporate domains.
 - the police are not an authoritative body, the courts are.  Some
   organisations would prefer the police to use the established
   mechanisms for gathering evidence (warrants, etc)
 - s6.1 is too technology-oriented.  Why do requests have to come
   over the web?  Is .csiro.au not a domain if a member of the
   network staff creates a domain as part of their standard
   network maintenance activities?  Or edu.au not a domain if
   a letter is written rather than a web form completed?

Now for the selection criteria:
 - `incorporated body' does not allow for associations or
   bodies formed by an Act of Parliament
 - Five full-time employees is not acceptable to government
   organisations as it breaches the agreement reached with
   the PSU on permanent part-time work.
 - why should domains that currently entirely fund themseleves
   have to pay $5000 for no direct benefit?
 - `remain unsaturated at all times' is not technically possible
   and is not even currently the case for the .au root.
 - australian government bodies prefer to self-insure.  Any
   other alternative is basically spending taxes unwisely.
 - submitting a business plan for an individual delegation
   or for the entirety of CSIRO are both impractical.
 - there can be no contigency for some domains.  If CSIRO
   is abolished its domain disappears, simple.
 - annual review is pointless for some domains.

           --------------------------------

The selection criteria for a new 2LD should list the
allowable grounds for public objections to creating a new
2LD.

For example, consider an application for sex.au.
A fair whack of the web sites in the US are sex-oriented,
so I can make a case for a 2LD for pornography sites.  I'll
make a case that existing .com.au sites are inadequate as 
companies not associated with the pornography industry
feel their business is adversly affected by being in the
same domain, and bodies filtering URLs would prefer Australian
pornography URLs to be easily identified.  How would this
be rejected on public-interest grounds without puting me
in a position to take ADNA to court?

-- 
glen.turner§itd.adelaide.edu.au     Network Support Specialist
Tel: (08) 8303 3936            Information Technology Division
Fax: (08) 8303 4400             University of Adelaide SA 5005
...- -.- ..... --. -.. -   http://www.adelaide.edu.au/~gturner
There are two major products that came out of Berkeley:
LSD and UNIX.  This is no coincidence.