From:           Nick Wallingford
Received:    1 August 2012

Question 1. Should the New Zealand domain name space be extended to allow registration at the second level, for example yourname.nz?
No
I can see no compelling reason to change the current system, and potential problems if it is...

Question 2. Are there any other undertakings that the Domain Name Commission should make while developing/implementing the policy?
No
I do not see value in 'developing' or 'implementing' a changed policy...

Question 3. Should new second level domains be created to cater for particular interest groups, such as .wine.nz or .sport.nz?
Yes
Yes, but within the context of the existing policies that already allow for new second level domains.

Question 4. Should new moderated second level domains be created to cater for domain names that require special protection, such as .bank.nz?
Yes
Again, I believe the current policies provide adequate direction and confidence in this regard.

Question 5. Should the registration of some names such as .com.nz or .gov.nz, be prohibited at the second level to minimise potential confusion? What names, if any, should be prohibited?
Yes
Any that the DNC feels might cause confusion...

Question 6. Do you agree with the rationale for the Sunrise Period that would enable existing .nz domain name holders first chance to register names at the second level? Why?
Disagree
No change to policy would mean no need for sunrise period...

Question 7. Who should be allowed to register a domain name at the second level when there are competing registrations at the third level?
*If* it were to eventuate, I would expect previous domain registration history should have some precedence, but recognise the difficulties that will ensue.

Question 8. Assuming only persons with a conflicting third level domain name may apply, how should that conflict be resolved? By consent? Or some other mechanism?
Consent
Consent if possible - coin toss if not!

Question 9. Should the Domain Name Commission consider extending its Dispute Resolution Service for a limited period to cover particular sub-domains when considering whether a name registered at the second level infringes a complainant’s rights?
No

Question 10. Is the approach as outlined in the proposed amended policy in Appendix C appropriate? Why?
No Response

Question 11. Are there any other comments you would like to make relating to this consultation?
I think the current .nz policies are perfectly adequate to provide a meaningful namespace for NZ. There is no significant problem that needs fixing by this solution!