On Sat, 27 Apr 2002 11:52:56 +1000, "Dassa" <dassa&#167;dhs.org> wrote:
>|> -----Original Message-----
>|> From: Jon Lawrence [mailto:jon&#167;jonlawrence.com] 
>|> Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 12:25 AM
>|> To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
>|> Subject: RE: [DNS] RE: auDA to consider new names for .au
>|> 
>|> 
>|> >You were equating the need for charging (higher) fees with the
>provison
>|> >of a professional service, as evidence in the past and present, this
>|> >does not hold true and the level of fees charged has no bearing on
>the
>|> >service provided in most cases.
>|> 
>|> No I wasn't.  I simply said that I think the DNS should berun
>professionally.
>|> You assume that I think fees should rise, which I don't.  
>|> For instance I think the US$6 per name per year that Verisign
>Registry 
>|> charge for .coms is way too high, especially as they have almost 30
>million 
>|> names under management.
><snip>
>
>One thing we should bear in mind is the difference between AuDA and
>Registries/Registrars operating within the .au namespace.  AuDA is
>primarily concerned with the overall management of the namespace and the
>fees they charge are to be used for different purposes to those charged
>by Registries/Registrars operating within the namespace.
>
>The $6USD fee you quote above is set by ICANN and is delivered into
>their control, much like the $11AuD quoted to go towards AuDA.  When you
>purchase a second level domain under .com $6USD goes to ICANN and the
>rest of the registration fee goes to the Registry/Registrar.  

This isn't quite right.  The US6/year fee for .com etc all goes to the
registry.  ICANN does not get that money or even a specific proportion
per domain name.  They do get around $1,000,000 a year or so from
Verisign but this is equivalent to less than 10 cents per name.

DPF
--
david&#167;farrar.com
ICQ 29964527