>_From: Larry Bloch
> 
> Vic, this makes no sense.
> 
> There is no reason why a website can't be hosted in australia using a .com
> that has been delegated to a local ISP.

> In fact the name servers could be run out of the USA and the sitre hosted
> locally.
> 
> There is *absolutely no* reason why name services and hosting services and
> for that matter email services need even be in the same country.

no but if someone has a .com already hosted then it makes no sense not to have the mirror
as .com.au, secondly you are assuming that the .com is avallaible. thirdly in filas case
they wanted a .com.au to create an image of a local presence. they didnt want the .com
host here either cause the parent company wasnt ready. 

you are also assuming that if a co has a .com it is no problem for them to get
a sub domain, often untrue.

as has been pointed out again and again, companies choose domain names over points
of image, and this is where the registrars should get out of the way. the domain
is the companies image, something many of the commercially naive registrars cant
seem to wrap there heads around. I mean really, are you in all honesty trying to tell
me that fila should have applied for a fila.wattle.id.au since it didnt have an acn?
thats montypythonesque lunacy.

the name space policy in australia is nothing but a nuissance designed to protect the butts
of the registrars. it does nothing to promote ecommerce, it has killed the market for 
international webhosting in australia. it make a business first exposure to the internet
a painfull exercise for local participants, it forces people to aquire unecessary business name.
and it delays the registration process. wow it must have taken a real commitee to design that one.

when are the policy keepers going to listen and stop pushing there own vested interests?

Vic