>for what? To quote kre's message:
>
>>   | You are aware that IANA Bills Robert Elz $100 (well when it was $100) 
>> +.AU
>>
>> This is rubbish (ie: 100% false), which is perhaps not surprising,
>> considering the source of that quoted line.

Oh, I'll bow my head in shame.  I didn't mean IANA, I meant NSI.  I'm sure
it was clear from the thread anyway. Or are we all so pedantic?

>as Robert Elz just pointed out, IANA doesn't bill him, and if InterNIC bill
>him, then IANA tell him to ignore it. It does seem that the statement that
>"IANA Bills Robert Elz $100" is 100% false,

Either way, a Bill was produced. And IGNORED. That was the point of the
matter.  Simply because I interchanged an acronym in a moment of
distraction doesn't mean the fact of the matter is incorrect.

>unles you claim that IANA and
>internic are the same organisation (ooh - global conspiracy!)

Um, no definately not.

>Ian (who is actually bored enough today to reply to this constant stream of
>     digital diarrhoea)

Bored?  I'm never bored.  To much to do.  

Another Connection sold to Telstra Internet today :)  Gee they must be
starting to know me in the Big Pond.