Don

Actually, I don't think anyone remembers a campaign to scrap .au - because
there never was one.

NetRegistry promoted .au.com as a viable alternative to .com.au at a time
when it took 10 days to register a .com.au. It also exploited the
difficulties in obtaining a generic or arbitrary name in .com.au - a
situation that remains the case today. You may recall that shortly after we
introduced .au.com the time it took to register a .com.au dropped from 10 to
2 days. There is no doubt that this was a competitive response from a
monopoly when threatened. So there has been good for .au from .au.com. Far
from scrapping .com.au, NetRegistry's business is to a large degree based on
.com.au - we are one of INA's biggest customers.

And I do blame a culture that questions my companies motives. Why should
those motives be questioned? We, like most companies, are not in business to
take unfair advantage of anyone. We're here to try and make an honest buck.
To serve our customers and to do our best to be professional, accountable
and above all conduct ourselves with integrity and honesty. This is the new
business paradim, as far as I am concerned, and it is the backdrop for the
overwhelming antipathy towards companies like ING.

As far as NetRegistry being involved with auDA, we were involved from the
outset of the NOIE sponsored working group, through to the formation of auDA
and I was a founding Board member of auDA. We would have been involved in
previous incarnations of DNS reform such as ADNA but we were not invited,
despite our repeated requests to join.

We are not a well funded, global corporation looking to squeeze small
players out. We are a small, unfunded, startup company that has struggled
our way through the tech wreck like all of you here. I'd like forums like
this to be about cooperating with like minded players; not use it as a forum
to snipe at each other. Is that what the Internet and forums like tihs are
all about? Taking pot shots? Frankly, its more than a little pathetic. There
is much more to be achieved than that.

Why are we not addressing ING in a way that strives for resolution? Why are
we still mistrustful of auDA, when it is clearly the path forward with no
alternative (like it or not)? Come on everyone, we can actually make a
difference if we can overcome this useless mud slinging.

As far as auDA is concerned, I have been far from a friend in times past.
But the point is that like it or not, it is going to be the de facto
regulatory body. You won't make it go away by sniping, nor will you change
decisions by commenting after a process that was open to public
consultation. ts precisely this sort of wasteful behavious that retards
progress. If you are interested, get involved in the process - its the only
way to have your voice heard and considered at this point.

My approach to DNS reform in Australia has always been to strive to ensure
that there is a level playing field, that the registry is run as a not for
profit entity and/or with strict regulatory control over price fixing. I
have advocated equal access to the registry for all players - small and
large - along the lines of hte UK system (where domain names cost a fifth of
what they cost here and get registered in seconds upon application).

I do not stand for complicated accreditation regimes to allow access to the
registry. Registering a omain name is a simple activity and the competitive
nature of the market ensures in the UK and elsewhere that little advantage
can be gained by being able to apply for and register a name - so why
restrict or overly accredit access?

As for AU.COM, the reality is that if you don't like it, don't buy it. I
fail to see why it should be so threatening. Its certainly hardly a plot to
subvert .au or .com.au  - that really is just flattery.

Regards

Larry Bloch
Chief Executive Officer
____________________________________________
NetRegistry     http://www.netregistry.au.com
Tel: +61 2 9699 6099 | Fax: +61 2 9699 6088
PO Box 270 Broadway NSW   2007 Australia



-----Original Message-----
From: Don Cameron [mailto:donc§mudgeeab.com.au]
Sent: Monday, 17 September 2001 18:58
To: dns§auda.org.au
Subject: Re: [DNS] Undesirables on this list


Harry, to an outsider to all of this foreplay, your tone and manner of
attacking individuals is become tiresome... your points are made. There are
no "ringleaders" here, and this nonsense has gone on long enough.

Larry, more than few people "in the trade" raised an eyebrow or two when
Netregistry became involved in AuDA, because we remember the campaign to get
people to scrap .au in favour of .au.com as a somehow viable alternative to
a true TLD. You can hardly blame anyone for questioning your companies
motives.

Have I stated the issues succinctly enough? - Can you blokes now find middle
ground? It's water under the bridge and time to move on.

Don Cameron

(affiliations with AuDA or domain registrants = none ... and after reading
recent postings I think I should keep it this way.)

--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 336 subscribers.
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request§auda.org.au to be removed.


--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 336 subscribers. 
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request§auda.org.au to be removed.