Second Level Domains Policy Review Submission

From:		Seeby Woodhouse
Received:	2 October 2003

1.
Q:  Are the twelve second level domains still appropriate for their 
communities of interest? 
A: No. the communities of interest 2ld's don't generally add much value 
other than same vague information about the domain. the most useful is 
probably .school.nz. other 2ld's are a pain because often entities will 
fit into more than one category and hence have to register multiple 
domain names to cover themselves - meaning confusion for end users e.g. 
orcon.net.nz/orcon.co.nz

2.
Q: Should any of the open 2LDs be moderated? (.ac, .co, .gen, .geek, 
.maori, .net, .org, .school)
A: no
comments: Moderation is hard to police and bad for domain name 
registrations in general. It should be easy to register any 
domain name - more domain names means more value.

3.
Q: Is there any need for the rationalisation of the current 2LDs? 
A: yes - removes complexity, makes the namespace much easier to use.

    3.1
    Q: If so, what process should be used for the removal or 
       closing of existing 2LDs?:
    A: allow people to register them as long as they want, but 
       prevent any new registrations in that particular 2ld space 
       and encourage people to cancel their domains. once they cancel 
       a domain it could not be hijacked by someone else as 3ld's would 
       not be able to be registered.
    
    3.2
    Q:  Should any such process be included in the 2LD policy?:
    A: yes
 
4.
Q: What criteria (types of criteria and specific examples) should be 
applied to the creation of new 2LDs? 
A:  don't think any new 2ld's should be created.

5.
Q: Is the current process for creating new 2LDs too simple, too complex 
or about right? 
A: about right
comments: 

6.
Q:  How much, if anything, should an application for the creation 
of a new 2LD cost? 
A: 

7.
Q: Who, if anyone, should be able to block the creation of new 2LDs? 
If so, why and how? 
A: The DNC should be able to block 2ld creation, but should not be 
obstructive - any 2ld in theory should be able to be registered if 
it is not already assigned (e.g. .co.nz)

8.
Q: Should there be different criteria or processes for the creation 
of moderated as opposed to open Second Level Domains? 
A: 

9.
Q: Is the level of public input in the process adequate; excessive; 
or inadequate?
A: 
comments: 

10.
Q: Are the methods currently used to seek public input (submissions; 
discussion period; straw poll) the best available, or would you 
suggest other/additional methods? 
A: 

11.
Q: Do you think direct public registrations should be accepted at 
the second level?  
A:  yes
Comment:  I think that NZ is too small to have a whole bunch of 
3ld's when a lot of much larger countries only use 2lds (e.g. .it, 
.be, .de, .cn etc) having shorter 2ld domain names will make them 
more user friendly and easier to remember. It also means that 
companies don't have to register a whole heap of domain names to 
protect themselves (e.g. Orcon.net.nz/Orcon.co.nz/Orcon.gen.nz etc)

12.
Q: If direct registrations are allowed at the second level, what 
kinds of transition arrangements would need to be put in place for 
existing third level registrants? 
A: existing third level domain name registrants should be given first option. 

13.
Q: What is the best way to deal with any conflicts between existing 
third level registrants if the second level is opened? 
A: If the same 3ld is registered by different people in different 
2lds, then the registrant with the most 3ld registrations of that name should 
be given the domain, or the parties should be allowed to bid for the domain 
name (only where there is conflict) E.g. Orcon owns orcon.co/net/geek/org/gen.nz - 
so should be given first option on orcon.nz even in someone happened to own 
orcon.iwi.nz. If someone owned xxx.net.nz and someone else owned xxx.co.nz 
and they both want the xxx.nz domain, then they could bid for the domain 
online - generally the person prepared to pay the highest amount would be 
the most elligible owner. bidding should not occur if there is no conflict.

14.
Q: Should registration fees be different (higher/lower) for Second Level 
domain registrations if they are opened directly to the public?
A: yes - lower as less admin overhead and no moderation.

15.
Q: Are there other options around the future of the Second Level that the 
working group should consider? 
A: no - open it up!

16.
Q: Are there any other issues you think the Working Group needs to consider 
in the course of the review? 
A: