Skip to main content

* This site will look much better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

New2LDsAP Meeting - 3 August 2010

Teleconference: David Cake, Sally Foreman, Jo Lim, Andrew Lonsdale, Kim Lowton, Graham McDonald, Peter Nettlefold (observer), George Pongas, Holly Raiche, Derek Whitehead

Apologies: Kim Heitman, Kim Lowton

Actions:

  • DW and JL to draft Panel’s final report to the auDA board.


Discussion:

1. Review of public submissions

The Panel received 8 formal submissions. To the extent they commented on the Panel’s draft recommendations, all submissions were either supportive or non-committal. It was agreed that nothing in the submissions required the Panel to re-open discussion of any of the proposals.

2. Finalisation of Panel’s recommendations to auDA board

Draft Recommendation 1: That auDA amend its new 2LDs process to give the evaluating Panel the discretion to conduct its own research with respect to new 2LD proposals.
The Panel confirmed the recommendation. It was noted that a useful method of research would be to ask registrars if they think there would be demand for a proposed new 2LD among their customers.

Draft Recommendation 2A: That the proposal for blog.au should not be accepted by auDA at this time.
The Panel confirmed the recommendation.

Draft Recommendation 2B: That the proposal for event.au should not be accepted by auDA at this time.
The Panel confirmed the recommendation.

Draft Recommendation 2C: That conf.au should not be reactivated by auDA.
The Panel confirmed the recommendation, noting that the minority opinion would be included in the final report. It was agreed to highlight in bold the Panel’s view that linux.conf.au should be grandfathered.

Draft Recommendation 2D: That info.au should not be reactivated by auDA.
The Panel confirmed the recommendation. It was noted that info.au did have the potential to fill an apparent gap in the market for a catch-all 2LD, but no suitable proposal came forward.

By way of general comment, Panel members felt that whilst the result may be regarded as negative (in that no proposals have been recommended), the process itself was a good one. It was agreed that the online survey was a very effective way of attracting public comment, and auDA should give consideration to using it again in future Panel processes.

DW thanked Panel members for their active involvement, and Panel members thanked DW for his chairmanship.
 


Last Updated: 17/08/2010 09:47