[council] GNSO Council draft minutes 28 July 2005

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

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org]

Dear Council Members,

Please find attached the draft minutes of the GNSO Council 
teleconference held on 28 July 2005.
Please let me know what changes you would like me to make.

Thank you very much,
Kind regards,

Glen
--
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
http://gnso.icann.org

<!--#set var="bartitle" value="GNSO Council Teleconference Minutes"-->
<!--#set var="pagetitle" value="GNSO Council Teleconference Minutes"-->
<!--#set var="pagedate" value="28 July 2005"-->
<!--#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">28 July  2005 </font> </p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Proposed <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-gnso-28jul05.shtml";>agenda and 
related documents </a></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>List of attendees:</b><br>
  Philip Sheppard - Commercial &amp; Business Users C.<br>
  Marilyn Cade - Commercial &amp; Business Users C. <br>
  Grant Forsyth - Commercial &amp; Business Users C<br>
  Greg Ruth - ISCPC <br>
  Antonio Harris - ISCPC   <br>
  Tony Holmes - ISCPC - absent - apologies - proxy to Tony Harris/Greg Ruth<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<br>
  Niklas Lagergren - Intellectual Property Interests C <br>
  Kiyoshi Tsuru - Intellectual Property Interests C. <br>
  Robin Gross - Non Commercial Users C.-   absent - apologies - proxy to 
Norbert Klein/Ross Rader <br>
  Norbert Klein - Non Commercial Users C. - absent - apologies  - proxy to 
Bruce Tonkin <br>
  Alick Wilson   </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">- Nominating 
Committee appointee <br>
  Maureen Cubberley - Nominating Committee appointee <br>
  Avri Doria -  Nominating Committee appointee 
  </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">17 Council Members<br>
  <br>
  <b>ICANN Staff</b><br>
  Olof Nordling - Manager, Policy Development Coordination  <br>
  Maria Farrell - ICANN GNSO Policy Support Officer<br>
  Liz Williams - Senior Policy Counselor <br>
  Tina Dam - 
  Chief gTLD Registry Liaison<br>
  Glen de Saint Géry - GNSO Secretariat <br>
  <br>
  Kurt Pritz - Vice President, Business Operations - absent - apologies <br>
  <br>
  <br>
  <b>GNSO Council Liaisons</b><br>
 Suzanne Sene - GAC Liaison - absent <br>
 Bret Fausett - acting ALAC Liaison <br>
 <br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Michael Palage - ICANN Board 
member (joined late in the call after an ICANN Board meeting) <br>
  </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a 
href="http://gnso-audio.icann.org/GNSO-Council-20050728.mp3";>MP 3 Recording 
</a></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Quorum present at 14:05 CET.<br>
  <br>
  <b>Bruce Tonkin</b> chaired this teleconference. <br>
  <br>
  <b>Item 1:</b> <strong>Approval of the <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-gnso-28jul05.shtml";>Agenda</a></strong><br>
  <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Grant Forsyth</strong> 
proposed adding under Item 9: Any Other Business, the appointment of the Vice 
President for policy development support. </font> <br>
  <strong>Marilyn Cade</strong> requested a <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01140.html";>list
 of topics</a> <br>
  <strong>Lucy Nichols </strong>requested 
  an item on WIPO II <BR>
  <br>
  <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-gnso-28jul05.shtml";>Agenda</a> 
approved 
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Item 2: Approval of the </b><br>
  <b>Minutes of 12 July 2005 <br>
  </b><br>
  <b>Deferred to the next Council meeting on 18 August 2005<br> 
  <br>
</b><strong>Item 3: Staff report</strong><BR>
- legal text for WHOIS recommendation <BR>
- policy status of new gTLDS (review Board and GNSO Council decisions)<BR>
- summary of public comments received during the <A 
href="http://www.icann.org/meetings/luxembourg/captioning-gnso-forum-12jul05.htm";>GNSO
 Public Forum</A><br>
<br>
<strong>- legal text for WHOIS recommendation 
</strong><br>
<strong>Maria Farrell</strong> reported that a response from the ICANN legal 
team was requested before  11 August 2005 on the legal text for the <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01159.html";>WHOIS
 recommendation as updated by Bruce Tonkin.<br>
</a> - policy status of new gTLDS (review Board and GNSO Council decisions)<br>
<strong>Bruce Tonkin</strong> suggested updating <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01158.html";>Olof
 Nordling's paper on the new gTLDs</a> with the full text of the 
resolutions.<br>
Maureen Cubberley suggested adding a reference to  Miriam Shapiro's <a 
href="http://icann.org/tlds/new-gtld-eval-31aug04.pdf";>report.</a> <a 
href="http://icann.org/tlds/new-gtld-eval-31aug04.pdf";>Evaluation of New gTLDs: 
Policy and Legal issues. </a><br>
<br>
<strong>Marilyn Cade</strong> drew attention to the<a 
href="http://forum.icann.org/lists/new-gtld-questions/";> ICANN public comment 
forum</a> on the New gTLD questions which closes on August 1, 2005 and 
expressed concern how Council would provide input.<br>
<strong>Bret Fausett </strong>commented that the ALAC was under the 
misconception that comments had to be made on the completeness of the questions 
rather than attempts at answering them.<br>
<strong>Grant Forsyth</strong> commented that he understood from the 
discussions in Luxembourg that it was agreed that the questions were not an 
appropriate part of the process and the process was being correctly referred 
back to Council to determine the strategy and to move forward.<br>
<br>
<strong>Bruce Tonkin </strong>proposed : <br>
- update on <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01158.html";>staff
 paper of material gathered</a> - 7 days <br>
- examine the question paper and the staff paper, discuss the next steps and 
Council's role on the council list  - 2 weeks <br> 
- a clear plan for the next 4 months stating what resources would be needed to 
implement that plan
<br>
- meet with the ICANN Board and the ccNSO council.<br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
  - <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01139.html";>summary
 of public comments received during the GNSO Public Forum</a><br>
  <strong>Bruce Tonkin</strong> proposed to defer to Item 5 </font></p>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Item 4: Actions arising 
from <A 
href="http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-15jul05.htm#p9";>ICANN Board 
meeting</A> </strong><BR>
  - <A 
href="http://www.icann.org/announcements/hijacking-report-12jul05.pdf";>domain 
name hijacking report</A><BR>
  - <A 
href="http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-15jul05.htm#p4";>GNSO 
review</A><br>
  <strong>Bruce Tonkin</strong> proposed  drafting a resolution for the next 
meeting that the Council accept the<a 
href="http://www.icann.org/presentations/ssac-lux-12jul05.pdf";> Domain Name 
hijacking report</a> and recommend that ICANN establishes a &quot;best practice 
area&quot;  on the ICANN website as the report advised. <br>
  It was generally agreed that the terminology &quot;best practices&quot; 
should be refined as best practices implied that the industry already had 
generally accepted best practices and that some of the reports recommendations 
were not yet in widespread use, while there was a high level of agreement on 
providing guidance for industry participants to consider in improving security. 
<br>
- <A 
href="http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-15jul05.htm#p4";>GNSO 
review</A><br>
<strong>Bruce Tonkin </strong>suggested a work schedule for the GNSO Review and 
requested volunteers for drafting.<br>
<strong>Marilyn Cade </strong>proposed a specific work session to focus on the 
GNSO Review.
<br>
<strong>Philip Sheppard</strong> commented that the GNSO Review should also be 
looking at the implementation of the <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01178.html";>GNSO
 Council review recommendations </a></FONT></P>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Item 5: Actions arising 
from <A 
href="http://www.icann.org/meetings/luxembourg/captioning-idn-workshop-13jul05.htm";>IDN
 workshop</A></strong><BR>
  - Cary Karp to request any action required from the GNSO Council<br>
  <strong>Cary Karp</strong> reported that a number of actors had clear 
interests in International Domain Names (IDN), such as the Browser development 
community, Unicode consortium, ICANN, the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) and 
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). A means should be found for all these 
perspectives to converge on a genuinely useful revision of the protocol 
underpinnings of IDN and how they should be implemented in all   registry 
policy.  Currently the browser developer sub-community, among others, <a 
href="http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/tld-idn-policy-list.html%20";>Mozilla
 </a> and a number of individuals led  the initiative. They were  diligent and 
consciousness about IDNs but  considered the needs of browser users and not  
the  registries' needs. Mozilla issued a <a 
href="http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/tld-idn-policy-list.html%20";>policy
 statement</a> describing the restrictive mechanisms they had implemented in 
their browsers that were not standards-based but completely idiosyncratic and 
consequently it was  difficult to implement the  name space wide uniform IDNs. 
The IETF  stated, regarding IDNs, that they were concerned with what happened 
on the wire, that which transmits the cable system, the fibre optic system that 
is the Internet, but not concerned with the applications of it, that is, what 
happened on the desk top or on the servers was not their concern. This approach 
 has led to gaping loopholes in the implementation to the clear and obvious 
potential detriment of Internet users. The altercations taking place  on how 
best to address the issue generally recognise  that there is no single solution 
to the problem but that the registries need to modify their policy to be more 
stringent, the ICANN IDN guidelines need to be more clearly focused, the 
Unicode consortium needs to present a more restricted basic character 
repertoire for the use of the registries, the browser developers need to 
realise that it is not a turn on or off situation. In the current situation the 
various factions are seeking comfortable dialogue where traditionally there has 
been very little.<br>
  <strong>Cary Karp </strong>suggested  establishing a liaison with the soft 
ware developers who were displaying responsibility towards their constituencies 
as it was important to view the process on a broad front. Everybody realised 
that there were several disciplines focused on points of action and  greater 
trust should be cultivated among them for them to converge.</FONT><FONT 
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
  The aim was expand the scope and horizon of the Internet, and given that all 
the actors recognised their responsibility, the next steps were  how to proceed 
working together.  <br>
  The current scrutiny to which  IDN was being subjected was triggered by 
discrepancy in gTLD policy which was in accordance with the guidelines and the 
community needed to be made aware that there was a process underway.<br>
  <strong>Cary Karp</strong> considered that Council had two roles:<br>
  - Council should be attuned to ICANN's responsibility in controlling its 
component of the process and since a significant matter of credibility was 
attached to this, it was important that the community should be made to feel 
confident  that ICANN had control :<br>
  - The GNSO Council should be supportive and encouraging of the revision of  
the ICANN IDN Guidelines process. <br>
  <br>
  <strong>Tina Dam</strong>  reported  that current work was underway to 
produce a draft position on the ICANN IDN guideline revision . The  IAB IDN 
working group met in Luxembourg and after the IETF meeting in Paris scheduled 
during the week 1 to 5 August 2005, there should be more information.<br>

  Tina further commented that there was a need for work around the guidelines 
that is, how they were working for different registries, but revision of the 
guidelines should be done by a broad community.     The President's committee 
for IDN's had been formed and would have representatives from different parts 
of the community who played  a role in the policy development of 
IDNs.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Ross Rader</strong> stated 
 that
there should be clarity on whether there was a policy that governed the 
registries use of IDNs provided that they followed the guidelines. <br>
<strong>Cary Karp</strong> responded  that it was explicit in the registry 
contract with ICANN that names with an xn// could not be entered into the DNS 
unless they were signatory to the ICANN guidelines. The IEFT did have a 
normative package for binding statements and ultimately there should be an 
agreed upon statement from the IDN registries.<br>
<strong>Cary Karp</strong> went on to comment that the sphere of immediate 
oversight were the people who registered in  TLDs and it was necessary to spell 
out responsible behaviour as a reliable guide. Currently the protocol basis for 
IDNs was  the issue and the foreseen discussions in Paris would be important in 
establishing the IDNa which is the protocols. <br>
<br>
<strong>Bruce Tonkin</strong> commented on a possible option:<br>
The key point was standards, and if the IDN guidelines were worked on by the 
registry community and others they could be looked on as standards. The GNSO 
may have a role in requiring that these standards be adopted by gtld registries 
as consensus policy.<br>
<strong>Bruce Tonkin</strong> suggested making a resolution at the next Council 
meeting supporting the update of the IDN guidelines.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Item 6: <A 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/issues/registry-services/final-rpt-registry-approval-10july05.htm";>Consideration
 of final report on process for use by ICANN in<BR>
considering requests for consent and related contractual amendments to<BR>
allow changes in the architecture operation of a gTLD registry. </A><br>
</strong><BR>
<strong>Bruce Tonkin</strong> stated that it was Council's intention to vote on 
the report and opened the discussion. <br>
<strong><br>
Philip Colebrook</strong> commented on behalf of the Registry constituency:<br>
&quot;The Registry constituency is comprised of a diverse range of Registry<br>
operators, both sponsored and unsponsored, located in differing 
jurisdictions<br>
and with a variety of business models. The Registries all require a certain<br>
flexibility to be able to work effectively with the local environment that 
they<br>
operate in, and we are encouraged by developments at the GNSO council and<br>
elsewhere that consider such matters. Our impending vote in favor of this<br>
motion is not intended in any way to constrain individual registries from<br>
receiving full consideration of circumstances particular to them when<br>
establishing the contractual basis for their operation. Underpinning this,<br>
however, is the need for Registries to be given parity, to be treated 
equitably<br>
and to have the opportunity to operate on a level playing field. We note 
that<br>
this principle is expressed in many Registry contracts, and believe that is 
of<br>
great importance when formulating policy.&quot;</FONT></P>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Marilyn Cade</strong> 
spoke in favour of approving the new registry services policy as a consensus 
policy.<br>
&quot;The issues which led to the need for a new registry services consensus 
policy are well known and remembered and a significant amount of work, research 
and commitment and participation throughout the process occurred, participation 
by all members who represent constituencies and changes and edits were made 
throughout that process. It is the responsibility, in my view, of the GNSO 
Council to develop consensus policy and it is consensus policy upon which the 
integrity of ICANN rests. Changing consensus policy through contractual terms 
is of great concern to me and I believe puts ICANN at risk. It is my view, and 
I hope that others will join me, that it is a well thought out, balanced 
documented and researched consensus policy that we have developed&quot;.<br>
  <br>
  <strong>Marilyn Cade</strong>, seconded by <strong>Lucy Nichols</strong> 
proposed:</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A motion to vote and approve the 
policy set out in the <A 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/issues/registry-services/final-rpt-registry-approval-10july05.htm";>final
 report on process for use by ICANN in<BR>
  considering requests for consent and related contractual amendments to allow 
changes in the architecture operation of a gTLD registry<br>
  </A>as a consensus policy of the GNSO Council and forward the policy to the 
ICANN Board for their acceptance.<br>
  <br>
  <strong>Ross Rader </strong>commented that there were &quot;certain things 
within Philip's statement that I couldn't agree with more, the notion of 
fairness, flexibility and equality that speaks to the need to support Marilyn's 
motion in that it will provide us with a basis we can equitably apply policy to 
all of the registries and I would encourage the other constituencies to support 
the motion&quot;.<br>
  <br>
  Formal nominative vote: 26 Votes in favour <br>
  - (proxy votes held for Tony Holmes, Robin Gross and Norbert Klein voted in 
favour). <br>
  - (Cary Karp, Philip Colebrook, Ken Stubbs voted in favour keeping in 
consideration the statement made on behalf of the Registry constituency )<br>
  <br>
  The motion carried unanimously.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Decision</strong> To 
approve the policy set out in the <A 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/issues/registry-services/final-rpt-registry-approval-10july05.htm";>final
 report on process for use by ICANN in<BR>
  considering requests for consent and related contractual amendments to allow 
changes in the architecture operation of a gTLD registry<br>
  </A>as a consensus policy of the GNSO Council and forward the policy to the 
ICANN Board for their acceptance.<br>
  <br>
</font><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Item 7: Actions 
arising from <A 
href="http://www.icann.org/meetings/luxembourg/captioning-gnso-forum-12jul05.htm";>GNSO
 Public Forum in Luxembourg</A></strong><br>
<strong>Bruce Tonkin</strong> referred to the <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01139.html";>Summary
 of the GNSO Public Forum</a> and proposed reviewing the main discussions after 
each public forum and identifying areas where action could be taken to address 
concerns that were raised.<br>
</FONT><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Action should be taken on  Ken 
Fockler's request regarding outreach on TLDs with more than 3 characters.<br>
  Suggestions were for a website page &quot;preferred practices&quot; as a 
repository reference for certain issues. <br>
<strong>Bruce Tonkin</strong> suggested proposing a resolution for the next 
Council meeting on 18 August 2005. </font></p>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Item 8: Creation of 
working group to review implementation of current</strong><BR>
  WHOIS policies related to Accuracy (e.g WHOIS data reminder policy, and<BR>
  WHOIS problem reporting system) <BR>
  - Niklas Lagergren proposed as chair<BR>
  (note this would be a similar process to that used to review the<BR>
  implementation/compliance with the <A 
href="http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-imp/Arc00/msg00054.html";>transfers 
policy</A>)<br>
  <br>
  <strong>Niklas Lagergren</strong> reported on creating a  working group under 
his chairmanship, that would report directly to the GNSO Council, as it would 
be assisting the GNSO Council to review the effectiveness of its recent new 
policies with respect to WHOIS. The output would be available for the Whois 
task force which would be working in parallel on the <a 
href="http://gnso.icann.org/policies/terms-of-reference.html";>terms of 
reference</a>. <br>
  The working group would not attempt to discuss new policies but would look at 
the WHOIS data problem reporting, how to make the implementation of the problem 
reporting system more effective, and how to collect more meaningful data on the 
effectiveness of the system in addressing WHOIS problems.<br>
 It would remain small, aiming to complete the work before the ICANN meeting in 
Vancouver. <br>
 <strong>Bruce Tonkin</strong> suggested that the creation of the working group 
with terms of reference, to be posted to the Council list, be confirmed at the 
next council meeting on 18 August 2005. <br>
 <strong><br>
 Jordyn Buchanan</strong> reported that the combined Whois task force work, met 
once since Luxembourg and issued a call for constituency statements on <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01034.html";>conflicts
 with National laws procedure </a>and <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01035.html";>tasks
 1 &amp; 2 from the terms of reference</a>. <a 
href="http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-dow123/msg00464.html";><br>
 Two  constituencies</a> provided statements on all <a 
href="http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-dow123/msg00465.html";>3 topics</a>, <a 
href="http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-dow123/msg00468.html";><br>
 One </a>constituency provided a statement on conflicts with National laws 
procedure. <br>
 The 
 deadline was July 21 2005 and <strong>Bruce Tonkin</strong> suggested  
drafting  reports and continuing with the information on task 1 and 2 at hand 
so as not to delay the process further.<br>
 The aim is to complete the policy development process on <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01034.htmlhttp://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01034.html";>conflicts
 with National laws procedure</a>  by the September 22, 2005 Council 
meeting.<br>
 <br>
<strong>Item 9: <A 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01050.html";>Consideration
 of revised consensus recommendation with respect<BR>
  to improving notification and consent for the use of contact data in the<BR>
  Whois system</A></strong><BR>
  <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01159.html";>Updated
 consensus recommendation</a> on improving notification to Registered Name 
Holders of the public access to contact data via the WHOIS service in response 
to comments received so far with the RAA Clause 3.7.7.5 as
requested by Niklas Lagergren in the GNSO Council meeting in Luxembourg.<br>
Deferred to the next Council meeting 18 August 2005. <br>
<BR>
- legal text required from ICANN legal team<br>
Reported on under Item 2
<br>
<strong><br>
Item 10: Any Other Business</strong><br>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>a. The appointment of the 
Vice President for policy development support.<br> 
</strong><br>
<strong>Grant Forsyth</strong> referred to his <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01060.html";>comment
 on the Council list on 28 June 2005 </a>  The Concern was noted because the<a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01049.html";> 
announcement </a>stated that the role of senior vice president of policy may 
not be filled for 9 or 12 months. The GNSO, as one of the policy Councils, 
should be involved with the President in defining the role of the Senior Vice 
President, in the appointment of that position and  working with the President  
to have that role filled as soon as possible given its importance. <br>
Grant suggested that Council  appoint a small committee to work with a similar 
number of representatives from the ccNSO and ASO and senior
ICANN staff members to fill that position. <br>
<strong>Olof Nordling</strong> quoting from the <a 
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg01049.html";>announcement</a>,<br>
&quot;ICANN is pleased to announce that Dr. Williams will be providing
consultancy services in the area of policy development. In this regard,
Dr. Williams will act as Senior Policy Advisor providing advice to Olof
Nordling, Manager Policy Development Coordination &quot;</font></FONT><font 
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">.</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, 
sans-serif"><br>
<a href="http://www.icann.org/biog/williams.htm";>Dr Liz Williams</a> briefly 
introduced herself to the Council.<br>
<br>
The following points were highlighted  in the Council discussions:<br>
- Filling the position was considered a priority.</font><font face="Arial, 
Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
- Clarity on the position  description and 
the requirement for that position.<br>
- The position description for the role be developed. </font></P>
<P><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Bruce Tonkin</b> <b>declared 
          the GNSO meeting closed and thanked everybody for participating.<br>
The meeting ended: 16: 26 CET. </b></font></P>
<ul>
  <li> 
    <p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Next GNSO Council 
</b><strong>Teleconference  will be held on August 18, 2005</strong> <strong>at 
 12:00 UTC.</strong> <strong>14:00 CET.</strong> <br>
      see: <a href="http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/";>Calendar</a></font><br>
  </li>
</ul>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<!--#include virtual="/footer.shtml"--> </font>