At 13:57 23/07/97 +0000, Kevin Dinn wrote:
>Below is the latest version of the criteria which is the result of
>discussions so far. ...
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>Selection criteria for DNAs
>
>Minimum requirements for DNA status:
...
>
>2. Must have at least 1 full time employee or equivalent to devote to=20
>DN applications,
>[toned down from requiring 5 full time staff, 1 on DNS; also added=20
>"or equivalent" to cover 2 * part time, contractor, etc.]

Reducing the requirement from 5 to 1 f/t employee or equivalent is
seriously underestimating the resources needed to provide a reliable,
customer-focussed DNA service for high-volume commercial domains. 
Staff are required for providing a help-desk service; for processing
invoices, payments and accounting; for software and systems admin support;
for dealing with ADNA/policy/regulator issues; in addition to the staff
needed to process applications for naming policies of complexity that
cannot be readily automated (e.g. com.au, tm.au). It would be irresponsible
for ADNA to risk the stability and reliability of the DNS by setting the
threshold requirements for new DNAs too low.

It is unreasonable to expect a prospective DNA to have all these staff in
place before being awarded a DNA licence.  Instead, I think the IAHC/CORE
have the right approach in demanding proof of company liquidity (at the
US$300K = AUD400K level) as a necessary condition for gTLD DNAs, so that
the candidate company is demonstrably in a financial position to invest in
the staff and equipment required before commencing their commercial DNA
service. I recommend that this requirement be included in the DNA selection
criteria.

PG