Question 1. Should the New Zealand domain name space be extended to allow registration at the second level, for example yourname.nz?
Question 2. Are there any other undertakings that the Domain Name Commission should make while developing/implementing the policy?
Question 3. Should new second level domains be created to cater for particular interest groups, such as .wine.nz or .sport.nz?
All specific New Zealand industry groups. Other wise you will get Brits, and much worse grabbing the domains to sell back. You should look at managing 20 plus additional names. .wine.nz, .sport.nz, etc.
Question 4. Should new moderated second level domains be created to cater for domain names that require special protection, such as .bank.nz?
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?
com.nz / gov.nz / all two letter names, us.nz, uk.nz, au.nz etc.
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?
It is a good idea, but I don't see how you can avoid the conflict when someone else owns the .org.nz as well as the .co.nz. They will probably be competitors and will not consent to the other side having the domain.
Question 7. Who should be allowed to register a domain name at the second level when there are competing registrations at the third level?
Only people with a competing name, however as a Brit, you shouldn't take too much attention to what I am saying. But please don't restrict the applications to NZ residents only, not for my sake but to stop the trustee fiasco which would follow such a decision. But when people attempt to restrict domains to geographic residency, you get all manner of clever trustee solutions arise to get around the problem. So what happens you get a load of prime domains, owned by foreigners via a NZ company. If the NZ company goes bust this makes a hell of a mess.
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 would be the best way, but in many cases this will not work. Not sure what you should do next. Pistols at Dawn.;-) (Seriously I don't know)
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?
Question 10. Is the approach as outlined in the proposed amended policy in Appendix C appropriate? Why?
Question 11. Are there any other comments you would like to make relating to this consultation?