Members: Alan Greenberg, Athina Fragkouli, Avri Doria, Becky Burr, Cheryl Langdon Orr, Eberhard Lisse, Izumi Okutani, Jordan Carter, Jorge Villa, Julie Hammer, Leon Sanchez, Mathieu Weill, Par Brumark, Sebastien Bachollet, Steve DelBianco, Thomas Rickert, Tijani Ben Jemaa (17)
Participants: Allan MacGillivray, Andrew Harris, Antonia Chu, David McAuley, Edward Morris, Farzaneh Badii, Finn Petersen, Gary Hunt, Greg Shatan, James Gannon, Jonathan Zuck, Keith Drazek, Konstantinos Komaitis, Lyman Chapin, Maarten Simon, Mark Carvell, Megan Richards, Maura Gambassi, Paul Szyndler, Pedro Ivo Silva, Phil Buckingham, Rinalia Abdul Rahim, Sabine Meyer, Samantha Eisner, Thomas Schneider, Tom Dale, Tracy Hackshaw, Vrikson Acosta, Yasuichi Kitamura 29)
Legal Counsel: Holly Gregory, Ingrid Mittermaier, Michael Clark, Miles Fuller, Rosemary Fei
Staff: Adam Peake, Alain Durand, Bart Boswinkel, Bernard Turcotte, Berry Cobb, Brenda Brewer, Grace Abuhamad, Hillary Jett, Kim Carlson, Laena Rahim,
Apologies: Giovanni Seppia
**Please let Brenda know if your name has been left off the list (attendees or apologies).**
- The Adobe Connect recording is available here: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p7y41nwn31r/
- The audio recording is available here: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ccwg-acct-14jul15-en.mp3
1. Welcome, Roll Call, SoI
2. Progress updates
3. Review Paris agenda (see attached – please note that the agenda is work in progress and is subject to change (topics as well as times) depending on contributions from Work Parties)
4 GAC input (see attached)
Welcome to call number 40.
Rollcall - anyone only on the conference bridge? (Cheryl will join the AC room)
Updated SOI's (none)
* Progress updates
3 sub-groups formed
4 calls held, with a final call later today. Will prepare documents for Paris.
Cheryl, Stress test WP
Final document has been distributed
We have added new tests based on public comment and discussions in Buenos Aires, on Larry Strickling's document, and the Board's impact assessment document.
There are place holders for some issues. Work will continue after Paris, and the model and mechanism chosen will influence the tests and what we have to say. The next stress test call will be at 11:00 UTC July 15.
Focus on the public comment and Buenos Aires comment, and reviewing that content. For the freeze collection we will have documents on the community powers, the AoC incorporation into the bylaws, on the community mechanisms and weights. We will focus on replies to public comment after Paris. Hopeful this will be done in time for the freeze.
Focus on revising the mission statement and core values. Content on this area in the public comment tool, which will be complete by the freeze. Content in the reconsideration section, and hope to be complete on the other sections by the freeze, should be close to complete by the freeze.
Holly: The 2 firms have been working to revise the powerpoint of July 7 to address the additional issues asked to take on. And will be ready before the doc freeze. Added details of how to consider the community mechanism as the sole model. Will provide a cross model analysis. And Malcolm Hutty's questions about sections 3 and 4 of the initial proposal to see if any of the models under consideration interact with those issues in a way that needs to be addressed. Nothing from those issues needs to be addressed.
Not for the freeze, but a new powerpoint for Paris, describing how a caretaker or interim board might function. This in response held with the chairs and some rapporteurs last week.
Holly: Seen some emails about the caretaker board. Concern that some of the solutions suggested are very complex, but will try to address these issues.
* Draft agenda for Paris.
MW: The agenda is subject to change. We wish to capture the group's expectations
Outcome: clarify direction on all key topics before finalize public comment 2 report. Important to remember we are already on course in a process, a lot of work has been done by the WP, very effective. Keep in mind, we are in a process of refinement, avoid the temptation to reinvent, we don't have time. And we must keep focused, and we have preparations for the 2 minutes timer clock for all.
We have a broad range and number of topics to reach agreement on.
Tijani: refinement phase, suggests no new idea, but that cannot be absolute. But we should listen to old and new ideas.
MW: Not that everything is decided, but difficult to accept new ideas that have not been documented before the meeting. And aware that we have to check for unexpected consequences.
Avri: In some discussion in some WP, every once in a while we get to a point to the point where someone says "lets put a question out in the second public comment", rather than seeking consensus among ourselves. And too many questions risk opening a 3rd comment process.
Alan: Agree with Avri, but we we can ask questions if they are only answering A/B, clear answers.
Eberhard: rather than tine constraints, one intervention/topic.
Keith: ICANN has a history of 2 minutes clocks.
MW: use the 2 minute clock if needed with a best practice of one intervention per topic.
MW: agree with Avri on limiting the number of open questions, but we also have the WS1 and WS2 definition to utilise. Also need to be clear on the CWG requirements. The need to achieved consensus, among members and then the chartering organisations. These can be our tools for managing the meeting.
See from the agenda, it is very full.
CWG requirements, Lise Fuhr. Long Q&A with legal counsel on their presentation. WP3 review. Stress test discussion. AoC review incorporation has some issues to be decided on, and the community mechanisms which will be the core of our work. Review of government input, which is the next agenda item.
Alan: WP1 - many parts depend on which organizational model we pick. And closure on many items will depend on the community mechanism.
Thomas Schneider: govt input and the agenda and intent of the meeting. Governments have to consult with our stockholders. Very difficult to share these constantly chinned documents. Note this is not a GAC consensus, but a collection of national positions. These comment are based on the public comment documents and this to and including Buenos Aires meeting. This is the state of the discussion in the GAC, and there is not yet consensus on many issues, or the role of governments in the IG ecosystem. And the WSIS+10 will also deal with these issues.
A reminder. Perhaps a step back. What are we to do: give the necessary elements to allow the transition to take place in WS1 and then a broad review of ICANN's accountability mechanisms as WS2. We need output that allows the CWG and ICG proposals to go ahead. And we have to endorse this is Dublin.
We should have a clear direction when we leave Paris. Care not to overload the boat, and look closely at the CWG proposal and the NTIA requirements, and what accountability mechanisms are necessary for the transition to take place. And everything not necessary for this transition, can move. The boar overloaded. And move the unnecessary to WS2.
What is the key expectation of the IANA transition, it seems to be predictability and stability. The community empowerment measures, are exciting, but is the IANA function transition the time for the possibly risky change.
What is needed and defer the rest.
MW: what would people be willing to move to WS2. But we must start with the CWG agenda. Encourage everyone to think about what issues they really care about and be willing to push to WS2. This will be core on any topics.
Becky: Very helpful GAC document, gave a sense of the conversation of the moment. The goal has always been to do in WS1 to make sure that WS2 can also be accomplished. We will hear more calls to de-couple accountability and the IANA transition, but that was not our charge from the community.
Thomas Rickert. Thomas,comments much inline with Mathieu's comments earlier. Risk that if we strip-down too many things we risk loosing acceptance and satisfying CWG and NTIA requirements. However, moving to WS2 does not mean the issue is gone, it will just be addressed later. We need concrete proposals for moving items to WS2.
MW: Care about shifting options when they have not been aired in the first report, would risk push-back on such changes.
Documents to be frozen at 23:59 July 14 (tonight). Staff will compile the package of documents for download.
* GAC input - government member compilation.
Issues discussed by govt up to BA meeting
Staff will provide a summary, it will be ready in the frozen package
* Leon: coordination call between the ICG,CWG and AO/AC and Fadi and Board members, Larry Strickling.
Monthly coordination call. A time line showing the three phases, to keep the 3 actors up to date on progress. The calls will be transcribed and recorded. As far as aware, these calls are not open.
Topics: timeline. Everyone looking to the Paris meeting and our outcomes. Depending on us.
Eberhard: F2F in or before Dublin?
MW: yes, we are discussing. Considering a meeting before ICANN Dublin starts on Friday, as well as one on the Thursday (of the meeting) to celebrate acceptance, or commiserate.
Staff will circulate a note about Dublin plans shortly.
Thank you -- look forward to seeing many of you in Paris on Thursday or Friday morning.
Kimberly Carlson: (7/14/2015 05:12) Welcome to CCWG Accountability Meeting #40 on 14 July! Please note that chat sessions are being archived and follow the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior: http://www.icann.org/en/news/in-focus/accountability/expected-standards
Rosemary Fei (Adler & Colvin): (05:54) Good morning/afternoon/evening/night.
Holly Gregory (Sidley): (05:56) Hello folks!
Rosemary Fei (Adler & Colvin): (05:56) How does one see the attached to a document being shared, please?
Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (05:56) Hi all!
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (05:56) Hello everyone!
Jordan Carter (.nz ccTLD member): (05:57) Rosemary - it's not attached to this document, I guess that's a copy paste from the email that announced the call
Michael Clark (Sidley): (05:58) Good day all
Holly Gregory (Sidley): (05:59) May we have the attachments please?
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (05:59) Hello everyone, happy Bastille Day !
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (06:00) merci Mathieu :)
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (06:00) Happy Bastille Day Mathieu!
David McAuley (RySG): (06:00) Happy Bastille Day, Mathieu
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:00) There is a lot of hall, making it very difficult to understand
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (06:01) Please mute your lines while not speaking
Athina Fragkouli (ASO): (06:02) hello all :)
Konstantinos Komaitis: (06:02) hello all
Rosemary Fei (Adler & Colvin): (06:02) Can't hear Jordan
David McAuley (RySG): (06:02) on mute?
Rosemary Fei (Adler & Colvin): (06:02) Can't hear Becky
David McAuley (RySG): (06:03) all communications lines going toward Pluto
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (06:03) Cannot get thru on phone bridge
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (06:05) We have at least 9 new developed stress tests to discuss in Paris on Friday
becky burr: (06:06) now on audio
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:06) Don't know what happened there - could not connect voice audio on Adobe room in any browser
Kimberly Carlson: (06:06) Stress test call is at 11:00 UTC Wednesday
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:06) seesm to be OK now tho
David McAuley (RySG): (06:07) yes
Avri Doria: (06:08) when is the freeze again, please.
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:08) 2359 UTC
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:09) in just under 12 hrs from now
David McAuley (RySG): (06:09) As WP2 participant want to give Kudos to becky
David McAuley (RySG): (06:10) Becky, that is
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:10) +1 David, kudos to Becky for the enormous work shes done of late!
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:13) looks like a massive piece of work done
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:13) congrats Becky
Avri Doria: (06:14) both rapporteurs have been outstanding.
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:16) i feel lke I see Adobe rooms in my eyelids when asleep :)
David McAuley (RySG): (06:18) good idea on use of two minute clock
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:18) Would the decision about phases and clocks not have to be made by the greoup instead of the co-charis by themselves?
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:19) Says who?
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:19) I think that the co-chairs are proposing this mode of work to us right now...
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:20) Did not sound like a proposal to me
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:20) +1 Matthieu it seems like a solid proposed work method
David McAuley (RySG): (06:20) hard to hear Avri
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (06:20) Now is the time to comment on these proposals
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:20) Avri super quiert
Alan Greenberg: (06:20) Cannot hear Avri
Holly Gregory (Sidley): (06:20) cant hear Avri
David McAuley (RySG): (06:20) better, thanks
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:20) better
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:21) If it is a proposal for us to decide I propose that we do not limit debate by time or contant, but allow each speaker only one intervention per topic, akin to the Roberts RUles of Order.
Keith Drazek: (06:22) The 2-minute clock has a long history at ICANN and I think is a reasonable approach to facilitating our engagement.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:22) 2 mins clock seemed to work well in BA
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:22) Hmm, interesting Eberhart - my instinct is that the ability to speak more than once helps tease out a discussion to a conclusion, but I've not seen a meeting run the way you suggest
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:23) The 2 minutes come from the Public Forum, not for working groups and I do not agree with it
Avri Doria: (06:23) we may also need to resort to using our members to determine consensus if the full room does not seem to.
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:24) i think we should only resort to the clock if we find that, er, long and repetitive interventions lead to a lack of, um, content
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (06:24) True, Avri. Although it will difficult for me to check with the 3 constituencies I represent, if we are voting on anything that's NEW
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:24) If nessesary yes but I would hope that we wont have to (Ref consensus)
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:24) Are we going to consider Sebastien's input, with regards to seating?
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:24) He wondered who is who and one way would be to seat the members separate from the participants and separate from the observers
Avri Doria: (06:25) hopefully the number of open questions = 0 - that is my prefererd minimum
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:25) Would strongly object to forcing the members to be seated separatly
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (06:25) the votes would need to be recorded, which would provide for a check on who is a member and who isn't. right?
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:25) Sebastien is on the Adobe so he can say if this was something he felt strongly about
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:25) Sounded so in BA
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:25) Exactly Sabine, and the members list is on the CCWG site.
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:26) His point was that it is difficult to figure out who is driving the process, if I recall correctly
Edward Morris: (06:27) Although Mathieu is certainly correct that there will be some participants in Paris who have not previously been very active on list or on calls it should be noted that there are many participants who have been far more active than some of the members.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:27) We all have SOIs and our status is recorded on the F2F in person meeting list.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:27) +1 Ed
Holly Gregory (Sidley): (06:28) What time will frozen docs be available and will they be available as a oackage?
Avri Doria: (06:28) True Edward, but in the end if we cannot reach consensus of the whole group we need for the memerbs to reach consensus.
Edward Morris: (06:28) I agree Avri.
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:28) We do not need for the whole group to reach consensus, only for the members
Avri Doria: (06:28) and some of the members are active enough for thei groups they represent. it is to the advatage of those doing the work to have done the work.
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (06:29) Organizational model? We're not changing from today's model of AC/SOs. I'm guessing you mean the enforcement mechansim, Allan
Holly Gregory (Sidley): (06:30) Where is the GAC document?
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:31) https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Reading+List+-+Face+to+Face+Paris
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (06:31) Appreciate that, Thomas. We are studying the Government input and trying to categorize it for consideration
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:34) And I, myself don't want to have to refer to the members/participants list all the time to note for example that James Gannon is a participant, Keith Drazek is a liaison and the Observers (of which at least one is even going to attend is not listed on the web site)
Avri Doria: (06:35) The problem is the defintion of 'necessary'
David McAuley (RySG): (06:35) The NTIA criteria don't really speak to accountability, do they
Athina Fragkouli (ASO): (06:35) +1 Thomas
David McAuley (RySG): (06:35) BUt accountability work is cleary required, as Secretary Styrickling has said often
Izumi Okutani(ASO): (06:36) I agree with this thinking and approach Thomas - prioritize on what is relevant to the transition
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:36) WS1 doesn't contain any matters that aren't necessary before the transition, that's the test we have been applying ever since we started our work. So I agree with Thomas in principle.
Izumi Okutani(ASO): (06:36) We have to think about priorities at this stage as long as we have assurance that WS2 issues will be considered
Avri Doria: (06:36) David yes, they have made the accountabilty requirements quite clear in many statements.
Megan Richards: (06:36) agree very much with Thomas Schneider's proposal to concentrate on essentials for the transition and later aspects subsequently (which must be commited as to principles- not in detail)
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:36) The pre-transition requirements are broader than just what is defined by the CWG's report.
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:37) Moving issues to where they do not belong for expendiency is not only violating the charter, it also flies in the face of the recent IPR panel remarks on accountability and transparency.
David McAuley (RySG): (06:37) Agree w Avri, Jordan
Edward Morris: (06:37) @Izumi. We need more than a guarantee of "consideration" of WS2 items for the transition to proceed.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:38) The CWG dependencies map what we need to hasve in WS! and the related work that is needed to enact those requirements. And the CEP's enable those dependencies.
Pär Brumark (GAC Niue): (06:38) +1 Thomas!!
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:38) I fully agree with Thomas' issue about that IANA needs to function. And whe have done nothing for this so far.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:39) Well said Thomas, may not agree with it all but good points to be made.
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:39) And many ccTLD Managers I have been speaking with have very serious concerns.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:41) +1 Becky, even without it being consensus its still gives us insight into the GAC that can be ahrd to asertain sometimes.
Thomas Schneider (GAC): (06:42) what we need is a clear signal to all that whatever will be "shifted" to WS2 is not off the table, but will be dealt with in a serious process with milestones and timelines etc.
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:42) A robust accountability settlement is an essential precursor for the IANA stewardship transition, given the reality of post-transition leverage or the lack of it.
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:43) so everyone agrees with the principle "do as little as possible in WS1" - it's all about what "as possible" means :-)
Edward Morris: (06:43) No up front accountability, no transition.
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:43) It's not the Accountability of the Function that needs to come first but the FUnction of the Functiuon :-)-O
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:44) The community was pretty clear in what it was looking for in response to our first Public Comment Report. So we have to very careful about later taking things off the table at short notice towards the end of the process.
Farzaneh Badii: (06:44) well, the function might not function without accountability
Farzaneh Badii: (06:44) I agree Jordan
Avri Doria: (06:44) And as long as there is confidence that the WS2 won't just be sloughed off once the transtion is done. Many peole have that concern.
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:45) You wiill not have Full Consensus if anything that belongs in WS1 is moved to WS2
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:45) That's why the WS1 has to give the skeleton of a robust accountability structure, Avri
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:45) can't leave major bits of it out
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:45) :0
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:45) :)
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:45) Avri, that relates to trust.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:45) Well I personally think that anything that is proposed to be removed from an already lean WS1 needs to be for a very specific reason and not just for convienience, we have trimmed it of fat already, lets make sure we dont inadvertantly trim the meat.
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:45) And, as you know very well, there is none.
Thomas Schneider (GAC): (06:45) @jordan: it is not "as little as possible", but what "is required for the replacement of the NTIA in the IANA process. and everything that is not "required" to replace the NTIA's role should not be part of WS1 but of WS2. if we do not take us all by the word here, we risk a successful transition in this very tight timeframe - which i think would not be in the interest of the community.
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (06:46) Changes to Core Values, Mission Statment, IRP, and AoC Reviews are all WS1 items. And some of them have minor impact on GAC ability to steer ICANN decisions.
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (06:46) THomas -- your definition of WS1 vs WS2 is not the distinction in the CCWG charter.
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:46) Thomas, that is a novel and different test which does not relate to the work we have been chartered to do. It is not NTIA's role in the IANA operations. It is NTIA"s role as the holder of the single source of external accountability that we have to deal with. It is not any of our right to change the test so late in the game.
Holly Gregory (Sidley): (06:47) When do you expect it to be posted -- so that we can get before travel?
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD member): (06:47) +1 to Holly's question
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:47) Work Stream 1: focused on mechanisms enhancing ICANN accountability that must be in place or committed to within the time frame of the IANA Stewardship Transition;
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:48) The operative word her is MUST
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:48) Work Stream 2: focused on addressing accountability topics for which a timeline for developing solutions and full implementation may extend beyond the IANA Stewardship Transition.
Pedro Ivo Silva [GAC Brasil]: (06:48) We need to bear in mind that one of the results of the transition is ICANN being devoid of an external oversight entity (at least for the DNS part) - so the CCWG WS 1 recommendations need to be based on this future fact
Jonathan Zuck (IPC): (06:48) Yup
Thomas Schneider (GAC): (06:48) @steve: the question is: which changes in the core values, mission statement, IRP and AoC review are "nessessary" for the replacement of the NTIA in the IANA mechanism. And which potential bylaw changes are related to an enhanced accountabilty reform for the whole of icann.
Thomas Schneider (GAC): (06:49) these may take longer time to be agreed on than till october...
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (06:49) other than what the group's expectation for the Paris agenda re: the government input are :)
Tracy Hackshaw (Trinidad & Tobago): (06:49) @Thomas (GAC) - +1 Agree
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (06:49) @Thomas. THank you. We'll think about your framing of that question.
Greg Shatan: (06:51) I would say that "enhanced accountability for ICANN" is necessary for replacement of the NTIA's role.
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:51) So does the IRP Panel :-)-O
Edward Morris: (06:52) @ Sabine. Very much appreciate Germany's enlightened and well consided saements contained in the GAC Paris document.
Edward Morris: (06:52) comments
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (06:52) thanks, but that would e.g. also be the only comment I could speak to.
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (06:52) so what are the group's expectations for these time slots?
Rosemary Fei (Adler & Colvin): (06:54) So Friday before, and Thursday after?
Eberhard lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (06:54) Thank you, so we can look at travel arrangements
Rosemary Fei (Adler & Colvin): (06:54) Thanks
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:55) WOw ending an hour early!
Pär Brumark (GAC Niue): (06:55) Thx all! See you in Paris!
Maarten Simon, SIDN: (06:55) bye
Tracy Hackshaw (Trinidad & Tobago): (06:55) Bye all
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (06:55) see you all in paris
Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (06:55) bye all
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (06:55) thanks everyone
Athina Fragkouli (ASO): (06:55) thank you all
Rosemary Fei (Adler & Colvin): (06:55) Goodbye, all. See you soon.
Holly Gregory (Sidley): (06:55) See you all in several days.
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (06:55) safe travels
Michael Clark (Sidley): (06:55) Bye all
Greg Shatan: (06:55) Bye all.