[council] Draft minutes GNSO Council meeting 19 August 2004

["GNSO SECRETARIAT" <gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Council members,

Please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council meeting held on 19 August
2004 in html attachment and plain text.

If you would like any changes made please let me know.

Thank you very much.

Kind regards

Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
***********************************************
19 August 2004

Proposed agenda and related documents


List of attendees:
Philip Sheppard - Commercial & Business users C. - absent - apologies -
proxy to Grant Forsyth/Marilyn Cade
Marilyn Cade - Commercial & Business users C. - proxy to Grant Forsyth (if
required)
Grant Forsyth - Commercial & Business users C.
Greg Ruth - ISCPC
Antonio Harris - ISCPC
Tony Holmes - ISCPC - joined call late
Thomas Keller- Registrars
Ross Rader - Registrars
Bruce Tonkin - Registrars
Ken Stubbs - gTLD registries
Philip Colebrook - gTLD registries
Cary Karp - gTLD registries
Lucy Nichols - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent - apologies -
proxy to Kiyoshi Tsuru/Niklas Lagergren
Niklas Lagergren - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent - apologies
Kiyoshi Tsuru - Intellectual Property Interests C.
Jisuk Woo - Non Commercial users C.
Marc Schneiders - Non Commercial users C. - absent - apologies - proxy to
Jisuk Woo
Carlos Afonso - Non Commercial users C. - absent - apologies - proxy to Marc
Schneiders/Jisuk Woo
Alick Wilson - absent
Demi Getschko - absent
Amadeu Abril I Abril - absent - apologies

13 Council Members

Paul Verhoef - Vice President, Policy Development Support
Kurt Pritz - Vice President, Business Operations
Barbara Roseman - ICANN Staff Manager

Vittorio Bertola - ALAC Liaison

Christopher Wilkinson - GAC Secretariat - absent
Suzanne Sene - GAC Liaison - absent

Jeff Neuman - Task force 1 & 2 combined - Co-chair
Jordyn Buchanan - Task force 1 & 2 combined - Co-chair

Glen de Saint Géry - GNSO Secretariat

MP3 Recording
Quorum present at 12:05 UTC,

Bruce Tonkin chaired this teleconference.

Item 1: Approval of Agenda

Agenda approved


Item 2: Approval of the Minutes of 20 July 2004 and the Minutes of 5 August
2004

Ken Stubbs seconded by Marilyn Cade moved the adoption of the Minutes of 20
July 2004 and the Minutes of 5 August 2004

The motion carried unanimously

Decision 1: The Minutes of 20 July 2004 and the Minutes of 5 August 2004
were adopted

Item 2: Draft initial report on procedure for use by ICANN in considering
requests for consent and related contractual amendments to allow changes in
the architecture operation of a gTLD registry.
Bruce Tonkin stated that the purpose of the agenda item was for Council to
decide whether further changes would be required or whether the report could
be published for the first 20 day public comment period.
Philip Colebrook expressed concern about:
a. the general lack of timelines in the process and
b. the manner in which ICANN would fulfill its functions.
Kurt Prtitz responded that any request for registry change would come to
ICANN through the registry liaison group and at that point a project team
would be created to evaluate that registry change. The team would vary,
depending on the nature of the registry change, with the right skills, such
as business or technical liaisons, to evaluate rapidly. There may be
parallel consultation with the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
(SSAC) and outside expert business analysis. The target timeline for a quick
look process would be 2 months between the registry submitting a request and
receiving approval for that request.
Ken Stubbs stated the need for a process:
a. that assured confidentiality between the registry operator and ICANN once
the request had been made,
b. such as stratifying the nature of the request at the beginning, so that
the ICANN staff could effectively quote a timeframe to help with business
planning for registrars and registries.
He reminded Council that Registries were required to give Registrars a 90
day notice period for any significant change implementation and proposed
that the notice period to registrars to be concurrent with the entry into a
process.
Ken Stubbs expressed concern that during the reconsideration process there
could be a halt in the registry operation approved by ICANN if a third party
contested the approval.
Marilyn Cade agreed with Ken Stubbs that flexibility in the business model
was needed in response to the community needs.

Kurt Pritz suggested that the quick look process including Board approval
could be completed in 2 months, and the ICANN General Council could respond
within 2 weeks to provide ICANN's view on whether the registry change
required approval under the registry agreement.
Kurt asked the gTLD registry constituency for input on a reasonable timeline
target for the process?
Philip Colebrook responded that the registry constituency had not determined
a position on this yet.
Paul Verhoef stated the importance of determining the timing of each step so
the operational reality matched the expectations

The general view on the report was:
a. Timelines needed to be clarified
- ICANN staff required feedback from the GNSO members a reasonable
timeframe,
- GNSO Council required feedback from ICANN staff on the timelines
b. General Counsel's advice be sought on the gTLD registry constituency
concern about the reconsideration process
c. More readable public comment format for the report

Bruce Tonkin proposed scheduling a GNSO Council call on September 9, 2004 to
finalize the report for public comment with the aim to provide clarity on
the timelines and answers to the questions on the reconsideration process.


Item 3: Update on policy implementation from ICANN
Bruce Tonkin commented that policy implementation would be a regular item on
the GNSO Council agendas in order to the review the status of policies that
have already been approved by the GNSO Council and ICANN Board
- to determine whether the policy had been implemented and
- at a future date, input on what measurement had been taken to measure
whether the policy had met its objective.


3.2 WHOIS: (approved by ICANN Board 27 March 2003)
http://www.icann.org/gnso/whois-tf/report-19feb03.htm
Bruce Tonkin referred to the Whois Data Reminder Policy (WDRP) which took
effect in October 2003. and asked Kurt Pritz about other elements of that
policy.
Kurt Pritz announced that ICANN was required to deliver a report to the
Department of Commerce (DOC) in November 2004 on the status and efficacy of
the implemented WDRP policy. As a result ICANN would be requesting
registrars to complete a questionnaire on the policy implementation.
Some policies were not followed through by ICANN to the implementation, for
example, deleting names which was considered to be a completed policy
because registries were effectively deleting names.


3.2 WHOIS: (approved by ICANN Board 27 March 2003)
ICANN recently posted two policies which would be formally effective on 12
November 2004.
- Whois Marketing Restriction Policy Policy documentation is available at
http://www.icann.org/registrars/wmrp.htm.
- Restored Names Accuracy Policy Policy documentation is available at
http://www.icann.org/registrars/rnap.htm.


Kurt Pritz noted the bylaws requirement to post the policies where a
complete overview of Consensus Policies applicable to ICANN accredited
registrars could be found and the registrars were given a fax written notice
of the policy.


Marilyn Cade expressed concerned about community awareness of the
implemented policies.
Bruce Tonkin suggested that a formal notice be sent to Council so that the
constituencies could be informed and suggested a link on the front page of
the ICANN website.


Item 4: Update on process for new gtlds

The MOU between ICANN and US Department of Commerce requires:

Continue the process of implementing new top level domains (TLDs), which
process shall include consideration and evaluation of:
a. The potential impact of new TLDs on the Internet root server system and
Internet stability;

b. The creation and implementation of selection criteria for new and
existing TLD registries, including public explanation of the process,
selection criteria, and the rationale for selection decisions;
c. Potential consumer benefits/costs associated with establishing a
competitive environment for TLD registries; and,
d. Recommendations from expert advisory panels, bodies, agencies, or
organizations regarding economic, competition, trademark, and intellectual
property issues.

Define and implement a predictable strategy for selecting new TLDs using
straightforward, transparent, and objective procedures that preserve the
stability of the Internet (strategy development to be completed by September
30, 2004 and implementation to commence by December 31, 2004).

Bruce Tonkin requested guidance from ICANN staff on what the steps were for
implementing a predictable strategy for selecting new TLDs and the timing of
those steps.

Paul Verhoef stated that ICANN staff were not yet in a position to report
back as they were still in the process of checking with the Department of
Commerce. The OECD report was delivered as well as a report on the business
aspects of the gTLDs already implemented that would be made available to the
Council and there was outside expertise flowing into the process.

Marilyn Cade expressed concern about the timelines and that there may not be
time to consult with Council before finalizing the strategy and suggested
that timely background information directly available to the GNSO Council
would be most useful.

Bruce Tonkin proposed requesting a Status report for the next meeting.

Item 5: Any Other Business:

1. Update on joint Whois Task Force 1 and 2:
Jeff Neuman and Jordyn Buchanan, co-chairs of the joint Whois task 1 and 2
which is currently called:
"Improving informed consent to the publication of contact data and improving
controls for 3rd party access to published contact data"
gave an update stating that an initial list of issues obtainable in the near
term had been created, the status of previous recommendations would be
examined, the focus was on the feasibility of tiered access and sub groups
would examine these issues.

2. Marilyn Cade suggested a review of the timelines in the policy
development process and a review of the GNSO Council and proposed drafting a
motion with the ICANN staff for the next meeting.


Bruce Tonkin declared GNSO meeting closed and thanked Jeff Neuman and Jordyn
Buchanan and everybody for participating.
The meeting ended: 13:15 UTC.

Next GNSO Council teleconference will be held on Thursday 9 September 2004
at 12:00 UTC
see: Calendar






<!--#set var="bartitle" value="GNSO Council Teleconference Minutes"-->
<!--#set var="pagetitle" value="GNSO Council Teleconference Minutes"-->
<!--#set var="pagedate" value="19 August 2004"-->
<!--#set var="bgcell" value="#ffffff"-->
<!--#include virtual="/header.shtml"-->
<!--#exec cmd="/usr/bin/perl /etc/gnso/menu.pl 'GNSO Council Teleconference 
Minutes'"-->
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">19 August 2004 </font> </p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Proposed <a 
href="http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-gnso-05aug04.htm";>agenda 
  and related documents</a><br>
  </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>List of attendees:</b><br>
  Philip Sheppard - Commercial &amp; Business users C. - absent - apologies - 
  proxy to Grant Forsyth/Marilyn Cade<br>
  Marilyn Cade - Commercial &amp; Business users C. - proxy to Grant Forsyth 
(if 
  required) <br>
  Grant Forsyth - Commercial &amp; Business users C. <br>
  Greg Ruth - ISCPC <br>
  Antonio Harris - ISCPC<br>
  Tony Holmes - ISCPC - joined call late<br>
  Thomas Keller- Registrars <br>
  Ross Rader - Registrars <br>
  Bruce Tonkin - Registrars <br>
  Ken Stubbs - gTLD registries<br>
  Philip Colebrook - gTLD registries<br>
  Cary Karp - gTLD registries<br>
  Lucy Nichols - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent - apologies - proxy 
  to Kiyoshi Tsuru/Niklas Lagergren<br>
  Niklas Lagergren - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent - apologies<br>
  Kiyoshi Tsuru - Intellectual Property Interests C. <br>
  Jisuk Woo - Non Commercial users C.<br>
  Marc Schneiders - Non Commercial users C. - absent - apologies - proxy to 
Jisuk 
  Woo <br>
  Carlos Afonso - Non Commercial users C. - absent - apologies - proxy to Marc 
  Schneiders/Jisuk Woo<br>
  Alick Wilson - absent<br>
  Demi Getschko - absent <br>
  Amadeu Abril I Abril - absent - apologies</font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">13 Council Members<br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
  Paul Verhoef - Vice President, Policy Development Support <br>
  Kurt Pritz - Vice President, Business Operations<br>
  Barbara Roseman - ICANN Staff Manager<br>
  <br>
  Vittorio Bertola - ALAC Liaison</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Christopher Wilkinson - GAC 
Secretariat 
  - absent<br>
  Suzanne Sene - GAC Liaison - absent<br>
  <br>
  Jeff Neuman - Task force 1 &amp; 2 combined - Co-chair<br>
  Jordyn Buchanan - Task force 1 &amp; 2 combined - Co-chair<br>
  <br>
  Glen de Saint Géry - GNSO Secretariat<br>
  <br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a 
href="http://gnso-audio.icann.org/GNSO-Council-20040819.mp3";>MP3 
  Recording</a><br>
  Quorum present at 12:05 UTC,<br>
  <br>
  <b>Bruce Tonkin</b> chaired this teleconference. <br>
  <br>
  <b>Item 1: Approval of Agenda </b><br>
  <br>
  Agenda approved <br>
  </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Item 2: Approval of the <a 
href="http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes2-gnso-20jul04.htm";>Minutes 
  of 20 July 2004</a> and the <a 
href="http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-05aug04.htm";>Minutes 
  of 5 August 2004</a><br>
  <br>
  Ken Stubbs </b></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b> 
</b>seconded 
  by<b> Marilyn Cade </b>moved the adoption of the <a 
href="http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes2-gnso-20jul04.htm";>Minutes 
  of 20 July 2004</a> and the <a 
href="http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-05aug04.htm";>Minutes 
  of 5 August 2004</a><br>
  <br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The motion carried 
unanimously<br>
  <br>
  <b>Decision 1: The <a 
href="http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes2-gnso-20jul04.htm";>Minutes 
  of 20 July 2004</a> and the <a 
href="http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-05aug04.htm";>Minutes 
  of 5 August 2004</a> were adopted<br>
  <br>
  </b>Item 2: <a 
href="http://www.icann.org/tlds/gtld-initialreport-registryapproval.htm";>Draft 
  initial report</a> on procedure for use by ICANN in considering requests for 
  consent and related contractual amendments to allow changes in the 
architecture 
  operation of a gTLD registry. <br>
  <b>Bruce Tonkin</b> stated that the purpose of the agenda item was for 
Council 
  to decide whether further changes would be required or whether the report 
could 
  be published for the first 20 day public comment period.<br>
  <b>Philip Colebrook </b>expressed concern about:<br>
  a. the general lack of timelines in the process and <br>
  b. the manner in which ICANN would fulfill its functions.<br>
  <b>Kurt Prtitz</b> responded that any request for registry change would come 
  to ICANN through the registry liaison group and at that point a project team 
  would be created to evaluate that registry change. The team would vary, 
depending 
  on the nature of the registry change, with the right skills, such as business 
  or technical liaisons, to evaluate rapidly. There may be parallel 
consultation 
  with the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) and outside expert 
  business analysis. The target timeline for a quick look process would be 2 
months 
  between the registry submitting a request and receiving approval for that 
request.<br>
  <b>Ken Stubbs </b>stated the need for a process:<br>
  a. that assured confidentiality between the registry operator and ICANN once 
  the request had been made,<br>
  b. such as stratifying the nature of the request at the beginning, so that 
the 
  ICANN staff could effectively quote a timeframe to help with business 
planning 
  for registrars and registries.<br>
  He reminded Council that Registries were required to give Registrars a 90 day 
  notice period for any significant change implementation and proposed that the 
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">notice period to 
registrars</font> 
  <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">to be concurrent with the entry 
into 
  a process.</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
  <b>Ken Stubbs</b> expressed concern that during the reconsideration process 
  there could be a halt in the registry operation approved by ICANN if a third 
  party contested the approval. <br>
  <b>Marilyn Cade</b> agreed with Ken Stubbs that flexibility in the business 
  model was needed in response to the community needs.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Kurt Pritz</b> suggested that 
  the quick look process including Board approval could be completed in 2 
months, 
  and the ICANN General Council could respond within 2 weeks to provide ICANN's 
  view on whether the registry change required approval under the registry 
agreement. 
  <br>
  Kurt asked the gTLD registry constituency for input on a reasonable timeline 
  target for the process? <br>
  <b>Philip Colebrook</b> responded that the registry constituency had not 
determined 
  a position on this yet.<br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Paul Verhoef</b> stated 
  the importance of determining the timing of each step so the operational 
reality 
  matched the expectations </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The general view on the <a 
href="http://www.icann.org/tlds/gtld-initialreport-registryapproval.htm";>report</a>
 
  was:<br>
  a. </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Timelines needed to be 
clarified 
  <br>
  - ICANN staff required feedback from the GNSO members a reasonable 
timeframe,<br>
  - GNSO Council required </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, 
sans-serif">feedback 
  from ICANN staff on the timelines<br>
  b. General Counsel's advice be sought on the gTLD registry constituency 
concern 
  about the reconsideration process<br>
  c. More readable public comment format for the report<br>
  <b><br>
  </b></font><b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Bruce 
Tonkin</font></b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 
  proposed scheduling a GNSO Council call on September 9, 2004 to finalize the 
  report for public comment with the aim to provide clarity on the timelines 
and 
  answers to the questions on the reconsideration process.<br>
  <br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
  <b>Item 3: Update on policy implementation from ICANN<br>
  Bruce Tonkin</b> commented that policy implementation would be a regular item 
  on the GNSO Council agendas in order to the review the status of policies 
that 
  have already been approved by the GNSO Council and ICANN Board<br>
  - to determine whether the policy had been implemented and <br>
  - at a future date, input on what measurement had been taken to measure 
whether 
  the policy had met its objective. <br>
  </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3.2 WHOIS: (approved by ICANN 
Board 
  27 March 2003) http://www.icann.org/gnso/whois-tf/report-19feb03.htm<br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Bruce Tonkin </b>referred 
  to the <a href="http://www.icann.org/registrars/wdrp.htm";>Whois Data Reminder 
  Policy</a> (WDRP) which took effect in October 2003. and asked Kurt Pritz 
about 
  other elements of that policy. <br>
  <b>Kurt Pritz </b>announced that ICANN was required to deliver a report to 
the 
  Department of Commerce (DOC) in November 2004 on the status and efficacy of 
  the implemented <a href="http://www.icann.org/registrars/wdrp.htm";>WDRP</a> 
  policy. As a result ICANN would be requesting registrars to complete a 
questionnaire 
  on the policy implementation. <br>
  Some policies were not followed through by ICANN to the implementation, for 
  example, deleting names which was considered to be a completed policy because 
  registries were effectively deleting names.<br>
  </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3.2 WHOIS: (<a 
href="http://www.icann.org/gnso/whois-tf/report-19feb03.htm";>approved 
  by ICANN Board 27 March 2003</a>) <br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">ICANN recently posted two 
policies 
  which would be formally effective on 12 November 2004.<br>
  - </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Whois Marketing 
Restriction 
  Policy Policy documentation is available at 
http://www.icann.org/registrars/wmrp.htm. 
  <br>
  - Restored Names Accuracy Policy Policy documentation is available at 
http://www.icann.org/registrars/rnap.htm. 
  <br>
  </font></p>
<p><b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Kurt Pritz</font></b><font 
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 
  noted the bylaws requirement to post the policies where a complete overview 
  of <a href="http://www.icann.org/general/consensus-policies.htm";>Consensus 
Policies</a> 
  applicable to ICANN accredited registrars could be found and the registrars 
  were given a fax written notice of the policy. <br>
  </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Marilyn Cade</b> expressed 
concerned 
  about community awareness of the implemented policies.<br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Bruce Tonkin</b> 
suggested 
  that a formal notice be sent to Council so that the constituencies could be 
  informed and suggested a link on the front page of the ICANN website.<br>
  <br>
  <b><br>
  </b></font><b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Item 4: Update on 
process 
  for new gtlds </font></b></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The <a 
href="http://www.icann.org/general/amend6-jpamou-17sep03.htm";>MOU</a> 
  between ICANN and US Department of Commerce requires: <br>
  <br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Continue the process of 
implementing 
  new top level domains (TLDs), which process shall include consideration and 
  evaluation of: <br>
  a. The potential impact of new TLDs on the Internet root server system and 
Internet 
  stability; </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">b. The creation and implementation 
  of selection criteria for new and existing TLD registries, including public 
  explanation of the process, selection criteria, and the rationale for 
selection 
  decisions; <br>
  c. Potential consumer benefits/costs associated with establishing a 
competitive 
  environment for TLD registries; and, <br>
  d. Recommendations from expert advisory panels, bodies, agencies, or 
organizations 
  regarding economic, competition, trademark, and intellectual property issues. 
  <br>
  <br>
  Define and implement a predictable strategy for selecting new TLDs using 
straightforward, 
  transparent, and objective procedures that preserve the stability of the 
Internet 
  (strategy development to be completed by September 30, 2004 and 
implementation 
  to commence by December 31, 2004). </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Bruce Tonkin</b> requested 
guidance 
  from ICANN staff on what the steps were for implementing a predictable 
strategy 
  for selecting new TLDs and the timing of those steps.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Paul Verhoef</b> stated that 
ICANN 
  staff were not yet in a position to report back as they were still in the 
process 
  of checking with the Department of Commerce. The OECD report was delivered as 
  well as a report on the business aspects of the gTLDs already implemented 
that 
  would be made available to the Council and there was outside expertise 
flowing 
  into the process.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Marilyn Cade</b> expressed 
concern 
  about the timelines and that there may not be time to consult with Council 
before 
  finalizing the strategy and suggested that timely background information 
directly 
  available to the GNSO Council would be most useful.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Bruce Tonkin</b> proposed 
requesting 
  a Status report for the next meeting.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Item 5: Any Other 
Business:</b></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>1. Update on joint Whois Task 
  Force 1 and 2:</b><br>
  <b>Jeff Neuman</b> and <b>Jordyn Buchanan</b>, co-chairs of the joint Whois 
  task 1 and 2 which is currently called:<br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"Improving informed consent 
  to the publication of contact data and improving controls for 3rd party 
access 
  to published contact data" <br>
  gave an update stating that an initial list of issues obtainable in the near 
  term had been created, the status of previous recommendations would be 
examined, 
  the focus was on the feasibility of tiered access and sub groups would 
examine 
  these issues.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>2. Marilyn Cade</b> suggested 
  a review of the timelines in the policy development process and a review of 
  the GNSO Council and proposed drafting a motion with the ICANN staff for the 
  next meeting. </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Bruce Tonkin</b> 
<b>declared 
  GNSO meeting closed and thanked Jeff Neuman and Jordyn Buchanan and everybody 
  for participating.<br>
  The meeting ended: 13:15 UTC.</b></font></p>
<ul>
  <li> 
    <p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Next GNSO Council 
teleconference 
      will be held on Thursday 9 September 2004 </b><b>at 12:00 </b><b> 
UTC</b><br>
      see: <a href="http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/";>Calendar</a></font><br>
  </li>
</ul>
<hr>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<!--#include virtual="../footer.shtml"--> </font>