Hi Ewen, On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Ewen McNeill wrote:

On 2012-05-30 10:09 , lenz wrote:

...

The whole 3rd level thing is really dying out.

"Namespaces are hard, let's go shopping"?

From a technical point of view, i am totally with you, I love namespaces and do use sub domains. Unfortunately the internet is not about geeks anymore, there is a whole raft of users (I deal with them every day) that have no clue about namespaces and, much to my frustration, don't want to be educated. all they care about is a easy to remember name, the shorter the better. The fact that they have to choose between a .co.nz or a .net.nz makes many customers just choose a .somethingelse ... maybe a .kiwi in the future.

Again, this is an observation I made with customers, this is not how I would love the internet to be ... but I am pretty sure we are way beyond what we geeks thought internet may be already. I am for a free market regulated TLD if it does not hurt too much, giving up a strict third level policy is in my view a "does not hurt" decision. cheers lenz -- twitter: @norbu09 current project: iWantMyName.com

In the case of a dispute, it would be better to allow the domain holder with the longest third level registration to have priority for the second level. It seems very likely to me that if 2nd level domains where previously available, that domain holders would have registered these over a 3rd level choice. Second this will prevent domain high-jackers rushing out and taking - for example - telecom.{geek,org,net,etc}.nz, just so they can shake down an existing domain holder. Nicholas On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Simon Green wrote:

On 30 May 2012 09:17, Michael NEWBERY wrote:

...

What is the problem being solved here?

The Consultation Paper acknowledges that this proposal will create new problems of its own, and lists some of the steps that will need to be taken to alleviate them.

I totally agree with Michael. From the e-mail: "If two or more domain name holders have the same name at the third level, no-one will be able to register that name at the second level unless they obtain the consent of the other third level name holders"

Take the domain name xtra.nz. Currently xtra.co.nz and xtra.geek.nz are registered by different registrants. This means unless the two parties agree*, xtra.nz isn't going to be able to be registered. Meanwhile, other ISPs will be able to use their 2LD. This is discussed in section 8.2 of the document, but no viable resolution is offered

If we were doing this process in the mid 90s, I would have thought it was a good idea. The Internet was young, and still mainly used by geeks. In 2012, it is not.

The only country I'm aware of that dropped 2LD was Canada (where the second level was a providence, not a type). Canada finally stopped accepting them in 2010. No other 'big' countries have done it to my knowledge.

-- simon

* to remain on topic, I can see a lot of beers being exchanged between these registrants. _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Joel Wiramu Pauling wrote:

On 30 May 2012 15:25, Nicholas Lee wrote:

...

In the case of a dispute, it would be better to allow the domain holder with the longest third level registration to have priority for the second level.

Bah Humbug!

why would you even consider putting an approval/sunrise or other process in place just because there are existing $STRING.$STRING.nz names?

Makes no sense; if a party feels that a 2ld is diluting their brand then they should have to demonstrate that they have taken steps to protect it - AKA Trademark laws.

Firstly, not every company in NZ can afford to pay for a trademark or a peon. Second, the same trademark can happen for different areas. My point is about timing, if several years ago ago I registered simpleshortname.co.nz for whatever usage, why would I have registered that if I could have instead registered simpleshortname.nz? On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Simon Green wrote:

On 30 May 2012 13:25, Nicholas Lee wrote:

...

In the case of a dispute, it would be better to allow the domain holder with the longest third level registration to have priority for the second level.

Why? That doesn't seem fair.

What's fair got to do with a domain holder who has been paying for a domain for 10+ years - thus contributing to the domain infrastructure for that period - have less rights than someone who has only had a domain for 1 year? Here is a personal example: nic(a)vpn:~$ whois kiwa.co.nz | grep datereg domain_dateregistered: 1998-02-17T00:00:00+13:00 nic(a)vpn:~$ whois kiwa.net.nz | grep datereg domain_dateregistered: 2011-07-05T20:57:01+12:00 and an example that goes the other way: nic(a)vpn:~$ whois ii.net.nz | grep datereg domain_dateregistered: 2001-01-16T15:21:12+13:00 nic(a)vpn:~$ whois ii.co.nz | grep datereg domain_dateregistered: 1999-10-20T00:00:00+13:00 Whatever the case, *.co.nz will likely be keep by most existing holders. Shifting email domains is much harder than web pages. Overall I less positives in this based on increased costs vs a system that has worked thus far. Nicholas

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Joel Wiramu Pauling wrote:

...

...

Makes no sense; if a party feels that a 2ld is diluting their brand then they should have to demonstrate that they have taken steps to protect it - AKA Trademark laws.

I think you are missing out on how the free market economy works. If you can't afford to hire peons to sit at the head of the line, and

Yes, but this is not exactly a free market. Domains are regulated by the DNC. I also think that it is important that any process that is decided reduces the the chance of lawyers getting involved. As you say, anyone who has the interest and capacity to fund this is likely already paid for a trademark and maybe received a 3rd TLD from another holder on that basis. Why create process for a new 2nd TLD domain structure, then let domain holders with similar 3rd TLD argue who has the rights to this new domain. In the case of one existing trademarks, then the trademark holder will likely have a greater right to the new domain. Otherwise, it's a made for lawyers bank balance moment. In the unlikely event that a domain holder was a 3 TLD, longer than another 3 TLD with trademark. Then I'm sure the trademark holder can argue that they have a greater right through the existing disputes process. Nicholas

On 31/05/12 12:49, lenz wrote:

we can sort that out in a landrush on a fist come first served basis. Are you suggesting violence as a way of resolving the conflicts?

-- don

On 30 May 2012 13:25, Nicholas Lee wrote:

In the case of a dispute, it would be better to allow the domain holder with the longest third level registration to have priority for the second level.

Why? That doesn't seem fair.

Second this will prevent domain high-jackers rushing out and taking - for example - telecom.{geek,org,net,etc}.nz, just so they can shake down an existing domain holder.

This is already covered in the proposal: "Limiting the Sunrise Period to registrations at the time this proposed policy is announced, mitigates the risk of people registering new names in an effort to impact on another person’s ability to register their domain name at the second level. There is no restriction on new registrations, just that any registered after 9am on Wednesday 30 May 2012 will not be eligible for inclusion in any Sunrise Period registrations." An earlier date applies to Internet NZ staff due to insider knowledge. To me this whole things seems like a way for Internet NZ to double their income. Most entities that have a non conflicting .co.nz domain will also want to register their .nz domain (even if they don't use it), just to prevent domain hijacking at a future date. And that means two payment of domain fees. (ala ICANN allowing arbitrary top level domains) I can't see any benefit to domain owners or the general public in opening up to 2LD registration. I will be replying to the proposal at some stage. -- simon

On 2012-05-31 16:16 , Simon Lyall wrote:

[date priority] A possible problem with that is that when I check who I find that the "domain_dateregistered" of any domain is no earlier than early-1997 even for domains that were registered earlier than that (such as waikato.ac.nz or vuw.ac.nz )

IIRC all those 1997ish dates were put on when the records were imported by Domainz, from Waikato. I suspect at this point any "pre-Domainz" data is probably long gone. (And given that Domainz did various ``tidying up'' -- some of which I recall having to pay them to put back into something approximating the state it was before they ``tidied up'' -- I'm not sure I'd personally trust data older than the import into NZRS.) From a date-priority point of view, amongst the same 3LDs in various 2LDs, I suspect that there'd be relatively few conflicts that predate the NZRS import. So the remaining list is probably small enough to check by hand, and negotiate with the people/organisations involved if there isn't an obvious solution. Ewen

On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 18:12 +1200, Martin D Kealey wrote:

...

I suspect at this point any "pre-Domainz" data is probably long gone.

Indeed, they never saw it at all. My domain actually dates from 1991, but I would be very hard pressed to prove that now.

For those interested in .nz domain name history, I'd considered going back to the monthly posts to nz.general that Mark Davies used to generate titled "Network Connected Organisations in New Zealand" and reconstructing at least which year and month a domain was registered. I'd toyed with displaying this information use Gource - http://code.google.com/p/gource/ (I've already used Gource to visualise all kinds of weird data) But I just haven't found enough round tuits to do it... -- Andrew Ruthven Wellington, New Zealand At home: andrew(a)etc.gen.nz | linux.conf.au 2013 | Come join the party... | http://linux.conf.au

On 2012-05-29, at 22:52, Simon Green wrote:

The only country I'm aware of that dropped 2LD was Canada (where the second level was a providence, not a type). Canada finally stopped accepting them in 2010. No other 'big' countries have done it to my knowledge.

There was more structure to .ca than that. Federally-incorporated entities, entities who could demonstrate a presence in multiple provinces and those registering domains supported by a federal trademark were eligible for label.ca. Provincially-incorporated entities and those which could demonstrate a presence in multiple cities in a province were eligible for label.pr.ca (pr being a two-letter identifier for a province, e.g. "on" for Ontario, "ab" for Alberta). Everybody else was eligible for label.city-name.pr.ca. Names originally registered according to these rules are still supported (at least, they remain in the CA zone, so presumably they are renewable). The current registration rules don't allow them, though. I think the Canadian experience was that the the requirement to evaluate each registration request to find out whether it plausibly met the geographic rules was cumbersome and labour-intensive. The problem wasn't that the CA domain had structure. Nobody has to do manual verification of whatever.geek.nz to find out whether the purpose of the domain is actually geeky; the problem that Canada solved doesn't seem to be an actual problem for New Zealand. A big concern, I think, is user confusion. The average non-technical user in New Zealand is well used to seeing companies advertise URLs with domain names ending in "co.nz". If that suddenly changed, there would be a period of adjustment. That adjustment was less necessary in Canada because from the early days there were plenty of names registered at the second level. Joe

And yet apparently there are more than 1 million names registered in .xxx already. So there appears to be plenty of support for that TLD. Cheers Keith On 6/06/2012 11:10 a.m., Sam Russell wrote:

Just stumbled across this: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2401017,00.asp - it appears that porn producers didn't want a .xxx domain, and every other organisation felt obliged to buy their own .xxx domains to protect their brands. It seems the people who will benefit most from more 2LDs will be NZ DNS registrars.

In March 2011, the Internet Center for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) approved the .XXX top-level domain. The porn industry staged protests http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2382185,00.asp, claiming that the new domain was merely a shakedown effort to secure more money.

Perhaps as a result, a majority of those surveyed said they had no plans to register an .XXX domain: 35 percent out of principle, and an additional 17 percent because of a lack of value. An additional 22 percent said they planned to buy an .XXX domain to protect a trademark, a practice that other industries, including universities http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2397499,00.asp, have employed.

"I do not see the value and I do not support .XXX," said Michael Klein, the president of/Hustler/, as quoted in the study. "We have been very vocal in our feelings about .XXX, which we feel all it does is cause an unnecessary financial burden to adult companies having to register all their domains under .XXX at ridiculously high prices whereas there there is no value as consumers can easily find what they want at any .com site."

On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Joe Abley mailto:jabley(a)hopcount.ca> wrote:

On 2012-05-29, at 22:52, Simon Green wrote:

> The only country I'm aware of that dropped 2LD was Canada (where the > second level was a providence, not a type). Canada finally stopped > accepting them in 2010. No other 'big' countries have done it to my > knowledge.

There was more structure to .ca than that.

Federally-incorporated entities, entities who could demonstrate a presence in multiple provinces and those registering domains supported by a federal trademark were eligible for label.ca http://label.ca.

Provincially-incorporated entities and those which could demonstrate a presence in multiple cities in a province were eligible for label.pr.ca http://label.pr.ca (pr being a two-letter identifier for a province, e.g. "on" for Ontario, "ab" for Alberta).

Everybody else was eligible for label.city-name.pr.ca http://label.city-name.pr.ca.

Names originally registered according to these rules are still supported (at least, they remain in the CA zone, so presumably they are renewable). The current registration rules don't allow them, though.

I think the Canadian experience was that the the requirement to evaluate each registration request to find out whether it plausibly met the geographic rules was cumbersome and labour-intensive. The problem wasn't that the CA domain had structure. Nobody has to do manual verification of whatever.geek.nz http://whatever.geek.nz to find out whether the purpose of the domain is actually geeky; the problem that Canada solved doesn't seem to be an actual problem for New Zealand.

A big concern, I think, is user confusion. The average non-technical user in New Zealand is well used to seeing companies advertise URLs with domain names ending in "co.nz http://co.nz". If that suddenly changed, there would be a period of adjustment. That adjustment was less necessary in Canada because from the early days there were plenty of names registered at the second level.

Joe _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz mailto:NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

-- Sam Russell

Network Operations Research & Education Advanced Network NZ Ltd ddi: +64 4 913 6365 mob: +64 21 750 819 fax: +64 4 916 0064

http://www.karen.net.nz http://www.karen.net.nz/

_______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1424 / Virus Database: 2425/5048 - Release Date: 06/05/12

+1 to that. Universally the people i've spoken with generally don't support the introduction of new TLD or 2LD which lead to nothing more than a scramble to protect trademarks and/or grab coveted domains for cybersquatting purposes. How many $'s each year wind up in the pockets of registrys, etc, simply because CompanyX has to register CompanyX.com .net .org .co.nz .net.nz .co .info .mobi .biz ?? (and now .xxx ?) When the company universally uses perhaps two of those? (how many companies actually make use of .mobi vice using something like m.domain.com? when it's domain.com that has such universal brand recognition?) I've not actually yet observed any demand to remove the 2LD in the NZ space from those i've spoken to (or overheard) and was surprised to see it appears to have so much traction. Mark. On 06/06/12 13:01, Sam Russell wrote:

Is that 1 million websites taking advantage of the TLD, or 1 million trademark owners protecting themselves?

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Keith Davidson mailto:keith(a)keith.co.nz> wrote:

And yet apparently there are more than 1 million names registered in .xxx already. So there appears to be plenty of support for that TLD.

Cheers

Keith

On 6/06/2012 11:10 a.m., Sam Russell wrote:

Just stumbled across this: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2401017,00.asp - it appears that porn producers didn't want a .xxx domain, and every other organisation felt obliged to buy their own .xxx domains to protect their brands. It seems the people who will benefit most from more 2LDs will be NZ DNS registrars.

*snip*

On 2012-06-06 15:54 , Greg Soffe wrote:

I always thought it would be nice if people had to provide a company number to register a .co.nz , so the NZ public could have a bit of faith in that there were actually legal entities behind the .co. names. Also if there was a requirement to be registered in a company name to get <company name>.co.nz squatters would have a hard time in NZ.

Or at least they'd need to spend a little bit more money (registering a NZ company isn't particularly expensive, can be done online, and the NZ Companies Office interprets conflicting names very tightly, such that "nearly the same" names won't conflict). I think it's far far too late to start treating .co.nz as anything but "legacy swamp space". However IMHO it would be quite reasonable (desirable, even) to have, eg, ltd.nz (registered company), inc.nz (registered society), etc. They'd have to be moderated 2LDs, to prevent squatters. Unfortunately the obvious "moderators" (Companies Office, Registry of Incorporated Societies) -- who could implement it as a "authenticate with us, specify DNS servers, get algorithm derived name" -- don't strike me as the most Internet savvy organisation... (And of course the InternetNZ/DNC policy for 2LDs actively discourages new 2LDs and moderated 2LDs. Plus of course "opening up the 2LD" would basically do away with any meaningful ability to have that sort of moderated hierarchy mean anything.) Still, one can dream. Ewen

On 06/06/12 15:54, Greg Soffe wrote:

I always thought it would be nice if people had to provide a company number to register a .co.nz , so the NZ public could have a bit of faith in that there were actually legal entities behind the .co. names. Also if there was a requirement to be registered in a company name to get <company name>.co.nz squatters would have a hard time in NZ.

"co" stands for "commercial", not "company". And as to your proposal, they do that in Australia. It's a classic example of making registration procedures so bogged down with rules to deal with any possible abuse that legitimate use suffers; the result is that registering a domain in com.au is a slow, bureaucratic and expensive process compared to getting under way in NZ. One of the things I like about doing business in NZ is that it is so easy to do. As a country, unlike the US & Aus, we seem to have managed to get away from the idea that you shouldn't be able to trade unless you are blessed by an army of faceless bureaucrats. And that, IMAO, is a Very Good Thing. -- don

I am all for them; screw it - it is a directory service for looking up IPs - we have random hierarchy imposed on top as if it actually conveys some important semantic information. Maybe it did at some point, but it hasn't for ages. Get over it. Domain names semantically have become an identity associative thing - if someone wants to be labelled as XYZ - you have a problem if your boxes only have X and Y options. The problem it solves is that there is a subset of Domain holders who feel their identities can better be expressed through a 2LD.nz - than through the existing boxes. -Joel

Well put Michael, I think the domain name its self is becoming ever more irrelevant to the average user. People search for what they want, and many people think that the Google (or other provider) search box is the address bar. When I look at various website stats the majority of users get there via search engines not domain names. That being said having a massive explosion of 2ld would cause me to question the validity and trust worthiness of some sites Gareth Davies Systems Administrator - Web Applications DD +64 9 574 0123 EXT 8465 www.fphcare.com -----Original Message----- From: nznog-bounces(a)list.waikato.ac.nz [mailto:nznog-bounces(a)list.waikato.ac.nz] On Behalf Of Michael NEWBERY Sent: Wednesday, 30 May 2012 4:19 PM To: NZNOG List Subject: Re: [nznog] Fwd: DNCL Second Level Consultation and Submissions On 30/05/12 2:26 PM, "Joel Wiramu Pauling" wrote:

I am all for them;

screw it - it is a directory service for looking up IPs - we have random hierarchy imposed on top as if it actually conveys some important semantic information.

Maybe it did at some point, but it hasn't for ages. Get over it.

Time moves on. There are browsers where I can type "Smiths Crisps" into the URL field and it searches, in real time, with live expansion, for the appropriate "Smiths". And will find me what I want, along the way distinguishing between the band, the clock maker, the snack maker, the UK conglomerate and the French oil exploration company. What has this to do with DNS? Not much. Point being that typing in latestephemeralmoviefranchise.com is not how the world actually gets places now. Hence, expanding the 2ld.nz is addressing an increasingly irrelevant problem, if it addresses one at all.

The problem it solves is that there is a subset of Domain holders who feel their identities can better be expressed through a 2LD.nz - than through the existing boxes.

I'm still not seeing a problem here. I'm seeing a solution pretending to be a problem. And no ob-beer. If this isn't relevant to nznog, what is? -- Michael Newbery IP Architect TelstraClear Limited Tel: +64-4-920 3102 Mobile: +64-29-920 3102 Fax: +64-4-920 3361 TelstraClear. Simple Solutions. Everyday Residential 0508 888 800 Business 0508 555 500 Enterprise & Government 0508 400 300 This email contains information which may be confidential and subject to copyright. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, distribute or copy this email or attachments. If you have received this email in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete this email and any attachments. TelstraClear Limited accepts no responsibility for changes made to this email or to any attachments after transmission from TelstraClear Limited. It is your responsibility to check this email and any attachments for viruses. Emails are not secure. They can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed and may contain viruses. Anyone who communicates with TelstraClear Limited by email is taken to accept these risks. _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog ____________________________________________________________ This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden.

Hi, Everyone seems to mentions domain and typing in URLs, there is also email addresses. At Kiwicon last year there was a presentation where the researcher had registered some .co.nz of some domains that should be .govt.nz. And well she got bunch of email that was meant for Govt departments, so that aspect also needs to be thought about as you can just type into the google search bar to get the email right. Dave On 30 May 2012 19:33, Sam Sargeant wrote:

On 30/05/2012, at 4:19 PM, Michael NEWBERY wrote:

...

Hence, expanding the 2ld.nz is addressing an increasingly irrelevant problem, if it addresses one at all.

What if the problem was "growth of .nz registrations is slowing" ?

...

And no ob-beer. If this isn't relevant to nznog, what is?

It's clearly of interest to network operators but it's a policy issue not a technical one. A decision either way will have no operational impact on how you run networks today or in the future. I hope all those who have posted with their thoughts will make a submission via the DNC.

Sam.

_______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Ewen McNeill wrote:

...

It occurs to me that "${DOMAIN}-${2LD}.nz" (for any existing 2ld of .nz, and domain in that 2ld) is probably nearly as good for phishing. For yet another unintended side effect. (Several other plausible variations, eg, ${BANK}bank.nz, ${BANK}-bank.nz, would probably also fool enough users to be worth the domain cost.)

Phishing is always high on everyones list, never mind the cause (IDNs come to mind). My last company had between 10 and 20 phishing cases a day, none of them were limited to any sort of pattern you could dream up. Opening up a second level will not increase anything in this respect.

In my experience phishing is all about the look of the page and how convincing the accompanying email is and nothing to do with the domain being used. (Most) Phishers aren't looking to leave the more obvious trail of paying for a domain and hosting and rather just look to exploit insecure websites and "hide" their dirty pages in dot prefixed directories. On 30 May 2012 16:21, Jacob Lister wrote:

As WhaleOil found this morning, what he thought NZ Firsts website (nzfirst.co.nz) currently has NZ First branding, a down for maintenance notification and a large photo of Justin Bieber. The site is not owned by the New Zealand First party (who have a .org with the same name), and speculation has it that the real owner is a Green party troll.

This illustrates a failure on WhaleOil's part. He obviously didn't have it bookmarked or use Google. Domain names these days are not there to facilitate guessing but are rather a branding tool (aside from their obvious technical purpose). Google it or click a relevant link - don't guess. On 30 May 2012 17:04, Gareth Davies wrote:

I think the domain name its self is becoming ever more irrelevant to the average user. People search for what they want, and many people think that the Google (or other provider) search box is the address bar.

Despite what I just wrote above, I still see merit in 2LDs. Knowing that .govt.nz domains for example are moderated means that when I'm on one of their sites I know it's (way more likely to be) legit. Even unmoderated 2LDs like .org.nz tell me something useful about the intent of the site.

That being said having a massive explosion of 2ld would cause me to question the validity and trust worthiness of some sites

Exactly. On 30 May 2012 19:12, Blair Harrison wrote:

So out of 480803 total registrations in .nz, we have 417188, or 86.7% of all total registrations being .co.nz, with the next two being 5.6% and 5.5%. Seems like some extra commercial type 2ld categories might be a good idea (tourism.nz, retail.nz, trade.nz?)

I agree that some new 2LDs could be beneficial but only in a controlled way.

Lumping the bulk of domains into .co.nz has already destroyed any semblance of hierarchy, so I don't really see much reason to argue about the sanctity of the old way of doing things. It's already well and truly gone.

I would argue the opposite in that the rarity of the non-co.nz 2LDs highlights that the hierarchy is working. If every man and his dog registered a .org.nz to go with their .co.nz then yes, .org.nz would then be pointless. On 30 May 2012 19:33, Sam Sargeant wrote:

On 30/05/2012, at 4:19 PM, Michael NEWBERY wrote:

...

Hence, expanding the 2ld.nz is addressing an increasingly irrelevant problem, if it addresses one at all.

What if the problem was "growth of .nz registrations is slowing" ?

I don't see how moving up one level helps that? So now my new company Xavier Tucker Rural Accountants can't register xtra.nz rather than xtra.co.nz? People still have to come up with a unique domain name and as Michael and others have mentioned/implied, once you have the domain you work it into your branding and use SEO to make it findable. If you're not chosing a .nz domain then I would find it hard to believe it's because you "have to" have .co.nz and more likely that it's because you perceive other ccTLDs or a gTLD as more relevant to your brand/site purpose. I disagree with opening up 2LDs. Mark

hi, On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Ewen McNeill wrote:

It occurs to me that "${DOMAIN}-${2LD}.nz" (for any existing 2ld of .nz, and domain in that 2ld) is probably nearly as good for phishing.  For yet another unintended side effect.  (Several other plausible variations, eg, ${BANK}bank.nz, ${BANK}-bank.nz, would probably also fool enough users to be worth the domain cost.)

Phishing is always high on everyones list, never mind the cause (IDNs come to mind). My last company had between 10 and 20 phishing cases a day, none of them were limited to any sort of pattern you could dream up. Opening up a second level will not increase anything in this respect. Besides, phishing in NZ is so simple it is scary. Take "national-bank.co.nz" - not the bank, it has been free for many years, looks like in 2010 someone finally took it ... Cheers Lenz

Ewen

_______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

-- twitter: @norbu09 current project: iWantMyName.com