snoopy
Top Contributor
AUDA is never going to be happy about all the new members as the only reason people have joined is because they view AUDA as incompetent and overrun by directors with conflicts of interest.
Direct registrations are happening
- Thread starter Shane
- Start date
AUDA is never going to be happy about all the new members as the only reason people have joined is because they view AUDA as incompetent and overrun by directors with conflicts of interest.
DomainNames
Top Contributor
WOW. It is obvsous some board members such as Melbourne IT and associated entities need to abstain from voting. The conflict of interests are overwhelming aren't they auDA? Staacking votes with Yes only surveys like the example above screenshot is a conflict of interest for a board member isn't it or what is??
http://www.domainer.com.au/whats-going-on-at-auda/
findtim
Top Contributor
these are major shifts in board meeting topics, congrats to everyone who has been voicing their concerns as surely dnt posts are helping make these things possible.
whats this crap about some abstaining from the process but reserving the right to re-enter at any stage, make a decision IN or OUT in my view, no sitting on the fence to see how the game is going, if you are on the board you are there for a reason.
tim
whats this crap about some abstaining from the process but reserving the right to re-enter at any stage, make a decision IN or OUT in my view, no sitting on the fence to see how the game is going, if you are on the board you are there for a reason.
tim
Shane
Top Contributor
Agreed. From the outside it looks ridiculous.
They're basically saying "I'm abstaining for good reason, but if my vote is needed to get the outcome I want and the lawyers give me the tick, then I might change my mind..."
Why abstain in the first place? I'm sure there's more going on than we're privy too, but from the outside it's not a good look.
DomainNames
Top Contributor
Possibly some might abstain if they know they will win to get the new .au proposal accepted and then they may reserve the right to jump back in if they need to make sure of it.... Just like writing propaganda material from a powerful entity to promote the new .au extension with questionable reasons and facts and then appearing to abstain from voting after it has already been pushed to a yes verdict via yes vote survey stacking.... ...Very obvious what is going on. Come on auDA start to stand up to this sort of behaviour and have the best interests of demand at heart and not Supply. Supply wants the new .au extension so they can make more money...that is all there is about it.
The promotion material above that Melbourne IT ( the Yes only vote survey ) sent out says the new .au will be better than the confusing .com.au and .net .au . That is a very interesting way for a board member and supply registrar to market the need to vote for a Yes vote of a new Australian extension. Does Supply such as Melbourne IT want people to not register and not renew their .com.au names and .net,.au names as they are too long now? Seriously? This is total B.S. propaganda marketing which may have fooled many and auDA should not have allowed it. They could easily track all of those votes perhaps and dismiss them. I consider this very poor marketing tactics and not ethical in my opinion especially to a database of people who may not really understand what is happening with the limited information anyone has been provided.
If Supply wants to quote the .UK and .NZ example as justification this is rubbish. Look at other extensions and the stuff ups and total chaos over IP rights, trade mark and domain name disputes, added costs, lack of full disclosure, now increasing numbers of .co. and .nz being dropped and not renewed after the initial registrations.
There are very few in supply who are stepping up to be transparent and factual and probably very few with names in other global extensions themselves who know many countries policies and markets.
DomainNames
Top Contributor
These names are available to registar! Protect your brand MelbourneIT... practice what you preach?
MelbourneIT.CO.NZ
MelbourneIT.CO.UK
MelbourneIT.co.za
etc etc etc
You can thank me later for letting you know so you can register them! I will not charge you anything or make any money from it but it does show a point doesn't it?
Strange how MelbourneIT has quoted the .NZ and .UK extensions success and not even registered them fully themselves? The fact is the .co.nz and .co.uk are far more popular and better known in those countries and globally.
MelbourneIT.CO.NZ
MelbourneIT.CO.UK
MelbourneIT.co.za
etc etc etc
You can thank me later for letting you know so you can register them! I will not charge you anything or make any money from it but it does show a point doesn't it?
Strange how MelbourneIT has quoted the .NZ and .UK extensions success and not even registered them fully themselves? The fact is the .co.nz and .co.uk are far more popular and better known in those countries and globally.
snoopy
Top Contributor
I think only because of the large amount of scrutiny and they are being told to abstain. AUDA has no doubt rung up the lawyers after all the claims from outside of conflicts on interest only to be told the board is indeed full of conflicts on interest! I do wonder about the validity of the original .au vote when you have people who should have obtained but did not. I wonder what Maddocks view is of the actual vote?
If George Pongas is now saying
Surely this is an indication he never should have voted in the first place?
The quote below from another director makes it sounds like he is only abstaining when told he must,
They should have excused themselves before the vote and AUDA has now incompetently started looking at the obvious conflicts well after the fact.
The directors should also be disclosing whether they have clients who are registrars and registries.
DomainNames
Top Contributor
The original vote is INVALID due to conflicts of interest including possible Supply "Yes Vote Survey Stacking"?
What is auDA going to do about it or the Commonwealth Department of Communications?
There is a lot of global media who seem to question the conflicts of interest so let's really hope to see some true transparency soon.
Maybe they do need a separate implementation group to discuss ALL of the facts and issues and not sweep them under the carpet.
What is auDA going to do about it or the Commonwealth Department of Communications?
There is a lot of global media who seem to question the conflicts of interest so let's really hope to see some true transparency soon.
Maybe they do need a separate implementation group to discuss ALL of the facts and issues and not sweep them under the carpet.
findtim
Top Contributor
all this should make the vote for .au VOID, how can they say they can't continue because of conflict but be on record as voting for what they now can't continue with???
Auda is in damage control to late, the .au decision needs to be scrapped and restarted, different board, different media, letters to all concerned, BLATANT manipulative proganda prevented by auda repercussions of licenses.
and burn the bus !
analogy: olympics announced today they are keeping urine samples for 10 years so drug cheats can be caught with future technology.
tim
snoopy
Top Contributor
Yes, that is what it comes down to. Very curious as to whether they have had legal advice on the validity of that vote.
snoopy
Top Contributor
Agree, the vote was tainted, that can't be papered over.
DomainNames
Top Contributor
Come on people!
More forum and auDA members need to start some comments. Let's have some debate and transparency.
Do not be afraid to comment former and present board members, policy makers etc ....your insight is valued and most welcome please!
What people do not like is closed door meetings and things done by stealth which have possibly harmful and costly affect. That is when conflicts of interest really do start to be questioned.
More forum and auDA members need to start some comments. Let's have some debate and transparency.
Do not be afraid to comment former and present board members, policy makers etc ....your insight is valued and most welcome please!
What people do not like is closed door meetings and things done by stealth which have possibly harmful and costly affect. That is when conflicts of interest really do start to be questioned.
DomainNames
Top Contributor
Just read the 2016 report from New Zealand's governing body. who run .co and .nz
Perhaps those claiming Australia needs the added proposed .au extension may wish to review the accuracy of their claims and redo their propaganda material we should just follow .UK and .NZ
https://www.dnc.org.nz/the-commission/reports
Perhaps those claiming Australia needs the added proposed .au extension may wish to review the accuracy of their claims and redo their propaganda material we should just follow .UK and .NZ
https://www.dnc.org.nz/the-commission/reports
"Figure 3 shows the total number of domain names increased from 640,342 (at 1 April 2015) to 656,607 (at 31 March 2016) – a growth of 16,265, or 2.5 percent. The dip between February and March 2016 reflects the one-year anniversary of the end of the preferential registration and registration period - an important part of the registrations direct at the second level change. It appears that some registrants, having exercised their preferential registration rights, have subsequently let the shorter version of their name drop."
That is the exact same fact as .SG, .CN and .HK. Some people took up the new registration but then many are dropped them at renewal time as the market and countries realise it was just another extension registrars wanted to push to more profit.
That is the exact same fact as .SG, .CN and .HK. Some people took up the new registration but then many are dropped them at renewal time as the market and countries realise it was just another extension registrars wanted to push to more profit.
DomainNames
Top Contributor
The .UK rules are the .UK is reserved for 6 years by default for the .co.uk registrant.
Registrants have until June 2019 to take up the offer.
http://www.theukdomain.uk/advice/do-i-have-uk-rights/uk-rights-faqs/
" uk Rights FAQs
Which domains are eligible for the rights to an equivalent .uk domain?
Domain names ending in .co.uk, .org.uk, .me.uk, .ltd.uk, .plc.uk and .net.uk are eligible, subject to the below criteria.
If your domain was registered before 23:59hrs on 28 October 2013 you will have the rights to the equivalent .uk domain, providing there was no other corresponding .co.uk, .org.uk, me.uk, .ltd.uk, .plc.uk or .net.uk registered.
If there is a situation where there are two or more domains with the same website name, the .co.uk will be offered the .uk equivalent. Where there is no .co.uk, the .org.uk will be offered the .uk equivalent. Where there is no .co.uk or .org.uk the .me.uk will be offered the .uk equivalent.
Where a .co.uk domain has been registered after 28 October 2013 and before launch on 10 June 2014 the co.uk domain holder will also have rights to the .uk equivalent, as long as there is no ‘clash’ with any existing domains meeting the criteria above.
The current domains that are not eligible for this process are .sch.uk and those not managed by Nominet, such as .ac.uk, .mod.uk, and so on.
Are the rules of registration the same as those for existing .co.uk and .org.uk domains?
The rules are largely the same for existing .co.uk and .org.uk domains, with two exceptions:
The new .co.uk registrant gets the right to the new .uk equivalent domain.
What happens if a domain name with a right to the .uk equivalent expires or is cancelled on or after the launch date?
If your existing domain name was not registered on 10 June 2014 or has not been maintained since .uk launch you do not qualify.
If your existing domain name (www.example.co.uk) is cancelled and deleted from the register, any right to the new .uk equivalent domain will have been lost and cannot be recovered. That includes .co.uk domains with rights.
What happens if I have the rights but do not want to register the domain name?
If your domain name is eligible for the .uk equivalent, but you don’t want to register it, no one else will be able to register it until 10 June 2019. After 10 June 2019, the domain will become available to anyone who wants to register it.
If you would like someone else to be able to buy the .uk domain name before the 10 June 2019 – for example you may have been asked if you would be interested in selling the domain name to another person or company – you can do this. You will need to register the .uk domain name yourself and then transfer the domain name to the third party.
For more information on how to check your rights to a .uk domain you can contact our customer support team"
Registrants have until June 2019 to take up the offer.
http://www.theukdomain.uk/advice/do-i-have-uk-rights/uk-rights-faqs/
" uk Rights FAQs
Which domains are eligible for the rights to an equivalent .uk domain?
Domain names ending in .co.uk, .org.uk, .me.uk, .ltd.uk, .plc.uk and .net.uk are eligible, subject to the below criteria.
If your domain was registered before 23:59hrs on 28 October 2013 you will have the rights to the equivalent .uk domain, providing there was no other corresponding .co.uk, .org.uk, me.uk, .ltd.uk, .plc.uk or .net.uk registered.
If there is a situation where there are two or more domains with the same website name, the .co.uk will be offered the .uk equivalent. Where there is no .co.uk, the .org.uk will be offered the .uk equivalent. Where there is no .co.uk or .org.uk the .me.uk will be offered the .uk equivalent.
Where a .co.uk domain has been registered after 28 October 2013 and before launch on 10 June 2014 the co.uk domain holder will also have rights to the .uk equivalent, as long as there is no ‘clash’ with any existing domains meeting the criteria above.
The current domains that are not eligible for this process are .sch.uk and those not managed by Nominet, such as .ac.uk, .mod.uk, and so on.
Are the rules of registration the same as those for existing .co.uk and .org.uk domains?
The rules are largely the same for existing .co.uk and .org.uk domains, with two exceptions:
- Where the registrant is overseas an address for service in the UK is required.
- PO Boxes are unacceptable in the address.
The new .co.uk registrant gets the right to the new .uk equivalent domain.
What happens if a domain name with a right to the .uk equivalent expires or is cancelled on or after the launch date?
If your existing domain name was not registered on 10 June 2014 or has not been maintained since .uk launch you do not qualify.
If your existing domain name (www.example.co.uk) is cancelled and deleted from the register, any right to the new .uk equivalent domain will have been lost and cannot be recovered. That includes .co.uk domains with rights.
What happens if I have the rights but do not want to register the domain name?
If your domain name is eligible for the .uk equivalent, but you don’t want to register it, no one else will be able to register it until 10 June 2019. After 10 June 2019, the domain will become available to anyone who wants to register it.
If you would like someone else to be able to buy the .uk domain name before the 10 June 2019 – for example you may have been asked if you would be interested in selling the domain name to another person or company – you can do this. You will need to register the .uk domain name yourself and then transfer the domain name to the third party.
For more information on how to check your rights to a .uk domain you can contact our customer support team"
DomainNames
Top Contributor
It is largely expected since there has been already a drop in renewals of the direct .UK, .SG. HK, CN, .NZ people are moving back to the more well known initial extensions.
The fact people are not jumping to register their shorter versions in other countries prove this no matter how much each countries supply registrars are trying to push it. There are a lot of registrants in other countries who have the option to get the shorter extension who have not done so.
Global statistics show people are becoming reluctant to pay for the direct less well known versions and even more reluctant to renew them after the initial registration period when most registrations where just for trial and defensive purposes.
Just like the .net.au in Australia lacks the same value and market perception as .com.au or the .net lacks the same value and market perception as a .com name..... no matter how hard supply and registrars try to spin it as the new latest and greatest fort every new extension they come up with.
You could also look at other flops registrars have tried to push such as .sydney, .melbourne and the other 200 or more new extensions globally.
People trust .com.au, .com, .co.uk, .co.nz etc. That is what the main market knows and what the internet has been founded and built on through many years of marketing and awareness.
The fact people are not jumping to register their shorter versions in other countries prove this no matter how much each countries supply registrars are trying to push it. There are a lot of registrants in other countries who have the option to get the shorter extension who have not done so.
Global statistics show people are becoming reluctant to pay for the direct less well known versions and even more reluctant to renew them after the initial registration period when most registrations where just for trial and defensive purposes.
Just like the .net.au in Australia lacks the same value and market perception as .com.au or the .net lacks the same value and market perception as a .com name..... no matter how hard supply and registrars try to spin it as the new latest and greatest fort every new extension they come up with.
You could also look at other flops registrars have tried to push such as .sydney, .melbourne and the other 200 or more new extensions globally.
People trust .com.au, .com, .co.uk, .co.nz etc. That is what the main market knows and what the internet has been founded and built on through many years of marketing and awareness.
Bacon Farmer
Top Contributor
Perhaps they'd like to examine the ultimate branch stacking - the inequitable supply side quota of directors.
snoopy
Top Contributor
Seems like AUDA's broken structure is becoming more apparent,
https://www.auda.org.au/about-auda/our-org/board-meetings/2016/20-june-2016-board-meeting-minuters/
The concept of the board discussing this and making changes is obviously flawed, because the board is the problem, so for the board to have a say in this would be just another example of a conflict on interest.
neddy
Top Contributor
Erhan, there has been no mention in recent auDA Minutes of a working group / panel being formed to discuss implementation models for direct registrations. This was something that Names Panel members were assured was going to happen (a two tier process).
Can you please enlighten us as to what is happening in this regard?
Can you please enlighten us as to what is happening in this regard?
DomainNames
Top Contributor
I have dealt with Singapore domain names and their system for many years.
I confirmed with Singapore their domain name administration SGNIC is run by the government. It is handled by the equivalent of our Australia's Department of Communications who could do the role of auDA and Ausregistry together probably?
https://www.communications.gov.au/what-we-do/internet
https://www.communications.gov.au/what-we-do/internet/internet-governance
SIGNIC do not spend money on elaborate expenses, parties, award nights, foundations ,grants, 1st class travel etc. They just focus on running administration of the domain name system.
If Australians want grants etc they have hundreds to apply for already from the Federal State and local Australian government. In my opinion this is not a role auDA should have expanded into. It is well outside of running the Australian domain name administration.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
"
From: DNQ <dnq@sgnic.sg>
Date: xxxx
Subject: RE: [DNQ#60739] Are you government body?
Cc: DNQ <dnq@sgnic.sg>Celebrate Singapore’s 51st National Daywith “ILOVE.SG” promotion at $5 or less per domain name!
Thank you for your email.
SGNIC is a fully owned subsidiary of the Infocomm Development Authority (IDA) of Singapore and is the appointed national registry responsible for authorising and regulating the registration, administration and management of domain names ending with the .SG Country Code Top Level Domain (ccTLD). More information can be found at SGNIC's website https://www.sgnic.sg/company-information.html
We do not have any foundation or grants. For government grant for companies who wish to start a website, you would have to approach IDA to assist. Alternatively, you may send your queries to info@ida.gov.sg as well.
Please contact us at dnq@sgnic.sg or (65) 6659-2534 if you require further clarification/assistance.
Best Regards
XXXXXXX
SGNIC Corporate Helpdesk | Tel: (65) 6659-2534 | Fax: (65) 6659-2532 | Email: dnq@sgnic.sg
Singapore Network Information Centre (SGNIC) Pte Ltd
10 Pasir Panjang Road, #10-01 Mapletree Business City, Singapore 117438
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infocomm_Development_Authority_of_Singapore
The Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore (Abbreviation: IDA; Chinese: 新加坡资讯通信发展管理局; Malay: Penguasa Pembangunan Infokom Singapura) is a statutory board of the Singapore government, under the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI). It was formed in 1999 when the government merged the National Computer Board (NCB) and Telecommunication Authority of Singapore (TAS), as a result of a growing convergence of information technology and telephony.[2] The Infocomm Development Authority (IDA) is responsible for the development and growth of the infocomm sector in Singapore. IDA functions as the country's infocomm industry champion, the national infocomm master-planner and developer, and the Government Chief Information Officer (CIO)."
I confirmed with Singapore their domain name administration SGNIC is run by the government. It is handled by the equivalent of our Australia's Department of Communications who could do the role of auDA and Ausregistry together probably?
https://www.communications.gov.au/what-we-do/internet
https://www.communications.gov.au/what-we-do/internet/internet-governance
SIGNIC do not spend money on elaborate expenses, parties, award nights, foundations ,grants, 1st class travel etc. They just focus on running administration of the domain name system.
If Australians want grants etc they have hundreds to apply for already from the Federal State and local Australian government. In my opinion this is not a role auDA should have expanded into. It is well outside of running the Australian domain name administration.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
"
From: DNQ <dnq@sgnic.sg>
Date: xxxx
Subject: RE: [DNQ#60739] Are you government body?
Cc: DNQ <dnq@sgnic.sg>Celebrate Singapore’s 51st National Daywith “ILOVE.SG” promotion at $5 or less per domain name!
Thank you for your email.
SGNIC is a fully owned subsidiary of the Infocomm Development Authority (IDA) of Singapore and is the appointed national registry responsible for authorising and regulating the registration, administration and management of domain names ending with the .SG Country Code Top Level Domain (ccTLD). More information can be found at SGNIC's website https://www.sgnic.sg/company-information.html
We do not have any foundation or grants. For government grant for companies who wish to start a website, you would have to approach IDA to assist. Alternatively, you may send your queries to info@ida.gov.sg as well.
Please contact us at dnq@sgnic.sg or (65) 6659-2534 if you require further clarification/assistance.
Best Regards
XXXXXXX
SGNIC Corporate Helpdesk | Tel: (65) 6659-2534 | Fax: (65) 6659-2532 | Email: dnq@sgnic.sg
Singapore Network Information Centre (SGNIC) Pte Ltd
10 Pasir Panjang Road, #10-01 Mapletree Business City, Singapore 117438
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infocomm_Development_Authority_of_Singapore
The Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore (Abbreviation: IDA; Chinese: 新加坡资讯通信发展管理局; Malay: Penguasa Pembangunan Infokom Singapura) is a statutory board of the Singapore government, under the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI). It was formed in 1999 when the government merged the National Computer Board (NCB) and Telecommunication Authority of Singapore (TAS), as a result of a growing convergence of information technology and telephony.[2] The Infocomm Development Authority (IDA) is responsible for the development and growth of the infocomm sector in Singapore. IDA functions as the country's infocomm industry champion, the national infocomm master-planner and developer, and the Government Chief Information Officer (CIO)."
DomainNames
Top Contributor
In my opinion this should not have been allowed by Ausregistry to sent out and promote and it clearly is a push for the new proposed .au extension.
I personally think it is a conflict of interest even with a small disclaimer.
Ausregistry is now owned by offshore USA company Neustar INC. Does this mean this means this offshore company has every Australian domain name registrants personal details?
Surely for national security and Australians privacy this role should be done by Australian government or at least a 100% owned Australian company.
" https://www.ausregistry.com.au/wp.../SOTD_Final_Report_2807_v63_lowres.pdf
The most effective way to reboot a product in decline is to look to innovation to refresh the offering. The great news is we have a rich history of innovation in the .au landscape. In 2000, .au Domain Administration (auDA) was appointed to administer the namespace and introduce a new policy regime to stimulate .au domain registrations. This led to the auction of 3,000 previously reserved generic domain names in 2001, which was warmly embraced by the market. In 2002, auDA liberalised the retail market and introduced a competitive model with Registrars, which resulted in strong growth and competition. Then in 2006, auDA updated the policy framework to allow for domain name monetisation with a change to the rule that stated registrations needed to be closely and substantially connected to the registrant. Again in 2008, auDA changed its longstanding policy and allowed changes in how .au domains were held, which spurred the creation of a .au aftermarket which again stimulated strong growth. It’s now 2015 and the namespace is again ripe for innovation. The path to the next 3 million domains It’s clear that in order to achieve the next 3 million .au domains, the namespace needs to innovate and match our competitors in the marketplace. The current auDA 2015 Names Policy Panel* is investigating whether policy changes should be implemented to allow second-level direct registration of domain names under .au
(eg: www.name.au instead of www.name.com.au). Other mature market country codes such as the United Kingdom’s .uk and New Zealand’s .nz have recently changed their rules allowing direct registrations under the Top-Level Domain. For .au to remain relevant, we need to innovate and match other products in the market. The introduction of shorter, new Top-Level Domains and the policy reforms of other country codes may mean the second-level structure of .au no longer demonstrates good market fit. This is exactly what the auDA Names Policy is considering, following the public consultation period (Further feedback from the community will be sought during future rounds of consultation). With the increase in choice and variety of new Top-Level Domain options available to consumers, registrants have access to simple and easy to remember domain names. The .au extension heralds to the rest of the online world a connection to Australia. How many people outside of industry truly understand what the com, net, org or id means in com. au, net.au, org.au and id.au? The Australian domain name industry must cater to all customers and not just industry - we are not the customer! Direct registrations under the .au Top-Level is exactly the type of innovation that .au requires to reinvigorate the namespace and position it for growth. Given .au only has one unique selling proposition – that it’s a signifier for Australian content online – we need to future-proof this position. Opening .au to direct registrations will augment the wellearned position the namespace holds as Australia’s trusted home online. Importantly it will ensure .au maintains market relevance and the fewer keystrokes needed in a mobile-oriented web is certainly one driver for evolution. Achieving 3 million domains is great, but it is not the finishing line and we now need to acknowledge the future challenges we face in the market. It is vital that we protect this national asset and honour the investment made in the namespace with every domain name sale to date. By George Pongas General Manager, AusRegistry, and auDA Board Director
*Disclosure: I’m a panel member of the auDA 2015 Names Policy Panel. AusRegistry submitted a position paper to the panel for consideration."
Who will benefit from another 3 million Australian domain names? Who besides some in supply is pushing for this or even thinks it is needed? No other body in the world such as .UK, NZ, .SG .HK, ZA .com etc is pushing to increase their registratiojns by 100%.
I personally think it is a conflict of interest even with a small disclaimer.
Ausregistry is now owned by offshore USA company Neustar INC. Does this mean this means this offshore company has every Australian domain name registrants personal details?
Surely for national security and Australians privacy this role should be done by Australian government or at least a 100% owned Australian company.
" https://www.ausregistry.com.au/wp.../SOTD_Final_Report_2807_v63_lowres.pdf
The most effective way to reboot a product in decline is to look to innovation to refresh the offering. The great news is we have a rich history of innovation in the .au landscape. In 2000, .au Domain Administration (auDA) was appointed to administer the namespace and introduce a new policy regime to stimulate .au domain registrations. This led to the auction of 3,000 previously reserved generic domain names in 2001, which was warmly embraced by the market. In 2002, auDA liberalised the retail market and introduced a competitive model with Registrars, which resulted in strong growth and competition. Then in 2006, auDA updated the policy framework to allow for domain name monetisation with a change to the rule that stated registrations needed to be closely and substantially connected to the registrant. Again in 2008, auDA changed its longstanding policy and allowed changes in how .au domains were held, which spurred the creation of a .au aftermarket which again stimulated strong growth. It’s now 2015 and the namespace is again ripe for innovation. The path to the next 3 million domains It’s clear that in order to achieve the next 3 million .au domains, the namespace needs to innovate and match our competitors in the marketplace. The current auDA 2015 Names Policy Panel* is investigating whether policy changes should be implemented to allow second-level direct registration of domain names under .au
(eg: www.name.au instead of www.name.com.au). Other mature market country codes such as the United Kingdom’s .uk and New Zealand’s .nz have recently changed their rules allowing direct registrations under the Top-Level Domain. For .au to remain relevant, we need to innovate and match other products in the market. The introduction of shorter, new Top-Level Domains and the policy reforms of other country codes may mean the second-level structure of .au no longer demonstrates good market fit. This is exactly what the auDA Names Policy is considering, following the public consultation period (Further feedback from the community will be sought during future rounds of consultation). With the increase in choice and variety of new Top-Level Domain options available to consumers, registrants have access to simple and easy to remember domain names. The .au extension heralds to the rest of the online world a connection to Australia. How many people outside of industry truly understand what the com, net, org or id means in com. au, net.au, org.au and id.au? The Australian domain name industry must cater to all customers and not just industry - we are not the customer! Direct registrations under the .au Top-Level is exactly the type of innovation that .au requires to reinvigorate the namespace and position it for growth. Given .au only has one unique selling proposition – that it’s a signifier for Australian content online – we need to future-proof this position. Opening .au to direct registrations will augment the wellearned position the namespace holds as Australia’s trusted home online. Importantly it will ensure .au maintains market relevance and the fewer keystrokes needed in a mobile-oriented web is certainly one driver for evolution. Achieving 3 million domains is great, but it is not the finishing line and we now need to acknowledge the future challenges we face in the market. It is vital that we protect this national asset and honour the investment made in the namespace with every domain name sale to date. By George Pongas General Manager, AusRegistry, and auDA Board Director
*Disclosure: I’m a panel member of the auDA 2015 Names Policy Panel. AusRegistry submitted a position paper to the panel for consideration."
Who will benefit from another 3 million Australian domain names? Who besides some in supply is pushing for this or even thinks it is needed? No other body in the world such as .UK, NZ, .SG .HK, ZA .com etc is pushing to increase their registratiojns by 100%.
Community sponsors
