AC Chat: 2019-01-16 Consolidated Policy Working Group Call

  Yesim Nazlar: (1/16/2019 14:56) Welcome to the At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call taking place on Wednesday, 16 January 2019 at 13:00 UTC.
  Yesim Nazlar: (14:56) Agenda: https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/x/Y-zvBQ
  Evin Erdoğdu: (15:39) Hello all, welcome.
  Alberto Soto: (16:00) Hello everyone!
  Lilian De Luque: (16:00) Hello everyone!
  Maria Korniiets: (16:01) Hello everyone)
  Jonathan Zuck: (16:02) I feel like a type A hipster. Working from a coffee shop (no internet yet at new house) but I'm the only one here!
  Greg Shatan: (16:03) Hi all
  Alfredo Calderon: (16:04) Good morning, good afternoon, good evening to all! / Buenos días, buenas tardes, buena noche a todos!
  Joanna Kulesza: (16:04) Hi all:)
  Greg Shatan: (16:04) Must not be the hip coffee shop, @Jonathan!
  Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond: (16:06) I am at a coffee shop too. Besides me is someone who has smoked some funny smelling tobacco
  Carlton SAMUELS: (16:06) Howdy all
  Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond: (16:06) which is strange....
  Jonathan Zuck: (16:07) @Greg, Busboys and Poets. Very hip
  Greg Shatan: (16:07) Oooh, that is hip.
  Justine Chew: (16:07) Busy, busy, busy .....
  Alfredo Calderon: (16:07) @Olivier, hope his not smoking something with 'pot or Marihua..."
  Greg Shatan: (16:08) I guess the hipsters are still asleep.
  Bastiaan Goslings: (16:08) Hadia and Alan are at the EPDP face to face meeting, that's why both of them are not here - if I'm not mistaken Alan sent an apology
  Greg Shatan: (16:09) I think Kobe is the Policy Forum, so that would make sense.
  Joanna Kulesza: (16:10) wonderful, thanks!
  Alfredo Calderon: (16:10) Great!
  Holly Raiche: (16:10) I think Maureen is organising the schedule - and consulting with Jonathan on policy sessions
  Marita Moll: (16:11) Yes, there is a group working on this. We had a meeting yesterday
  Justine Chew: (16:11) Woohoo, we're chugging along nicely :)
  Joanna Kulesza: (16:11) @Holly, indeed, we'll e in touch with Maureen on the details if OCL, JZ and the policy team comply with our request 
  Justine Chew: (16:12) Can hear you well, Marita
  Holly Raiche: (16:14) I agree with that proposal
  Greg Shatan: (16:15) I agree with this as well.
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:15) I agree too. ISO codes are more important than business
  Justine Chew: (16:15) @Marita, I'm taking notes
  Holly Raiche: (16:15) Maybe have staff note who votes
  Bastiaan Goslings: (16:16) I have no problem with this, but in a nutshell: what is the rationale to agree with PR#2? 
  Greg Shatan: (16:16) It’s not just a question of “business”; it’s vs. any other use.
  Justine Chew: (16:16) I'm going to take particular note of any objections or disagreement
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:16) Bastiaan: As I understand, if new countries arise in future, they will get a new ISO code and that should be reserved
  Holly Raiche: (16:17) Agree with Lutz - 
  Joanna Kulesza: (16:17) ISO code relies on a UN decision 
  Bastiaan Goslings: (16:17) @Lutz: thanks
  Holly Raiche: (16:18) @ Joanna - why is it a UN decision?
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:18) We had this discussion on .ps for palestine in 2000
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (16:18) Good morning all...apologies for my tardiness
  Bastiaan Goslings: (16:19) I understand the reserving of the 2 letter combinations for ccTLds in the ISO standard
  Joanna Kulesza: (16:19) @Lutz - is there a .ps or Palestine?
  Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond: (16:19) Greg I think that your mic has unplugged itself
  Bastiaan Goslings: (16:19) But this is about _all_ two character combinations
  A-Eduardo Diaz: (16:19) There are currently 190+ countries. Two letters will allow for only a maximum of  99 ccTLDs. Where do the rest gof the countries go?
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:20) Joanna: It was one of the hot topics for ICANN global election candidates
  Holly Raiche: (16:20) @ Bastiaan - I think the reservation for ALL is to accommodate the possibiloity of new countries
  Joanna Kulesza: (16:20) @Lutz I can imagine:) have we settled this?
  Justine Chew: (16:20) The policy is that all new gTLD MUST be at least 3 letters.
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (16:20) two letters cant work, I agree
  Greg Shatan: (16:21) This is only about letter-letter, Bastiaan.
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (16:21) concur w/3 letters
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:22) [a-z]{2} = 26^2 = 676
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:22) Personally I'd reserver 3 Letters for the same reason, but I fear it's to late
  Alfredo Calderon: (16:23) +1 Lutz. That would be the maximum number of two-letter combinations .
  A-Eduardo Diaz: (16:23) @Lutz: You are rigth. I was looking at it based on numbers and not letters. Thnas fr the clarification
  Holly Raiche: (16:23) @ Lutz - do we need 3 characters for countries -in the future
  Greg Shatan: (16:23) The reasoning is not the same, since 3 letter is not used to make ccTLDs.
  Jonathan Zuck: (16:23) so we're reserving all 3 letters as well?
  Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond: (16:23) looks like it
  Maria Korniiets: (16:23) +1 Lutz
  Greg Shatan: (16:24) No, it is only the 3166 list that is being reserved.
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (16:24) yes 3 letter is better giving the way things are going this days who knows more countries would be split out (maybe)
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (16:24) +1 Lutz
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:25) Example .cat
  Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond: (16:25) What about if we want to use 3 letter airport codes?
  Greg Shatan: (16:25) Correct
  Greg Shatan: (16:26) OCL, these are available.
  Bastiaan Goslings: (16:27) So reservering the ISO 3166-1 alpha 3 codes for country and territory names -which I am fine with- is not the same as reserving them for the use for ccTlds ('since 3 letter is not used to make ccTLDs.')
  Greg Shatan: (16:27) They would be gTLDs,
  Bastiaan Goslings: (16:27) Ok thanks
  Greg Shatan: (16:27) Or we would jump off that bridge when we come to it.
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:27) I do not speak about country, but regions.
  Bastiaan Goslings: (16:28) @Lutz: I say 'country'as that is what the slide refers to
  Greg Shatan: (16:29) Regions are not dealt with here.
  Greg Shatan: (16:30) I support the “in between” proposal.
  Satish Babu: (16:30) There are also IDN ccTLDs
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:31) Satish: It's complicated
  Holly Raiche: (16:31) The next issue is who defines public interest
  Jonathan Zuck: (16:32) devil will be in the details
  Joanna Kulesza: (16:32) +1 Jon
  Holly Raiche: (16:32) Exactly my pooint
  Greg Shatan: (16:32) I think that the relevant public authorities decide the public interest.
  Greg Shatan: (16:33) Since they have been given the veto power.
  Justine Chew: (16:33) +1 Marita
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (16:33) +1 Marita
  Holly Raiche: (16:34) Agree with the need for further consultation
  Marita Moll: (16:35) I would like it for the next section so I have more opportunity to speak to it
  Holly Raiche: (16:37) @ Greg - that makes more sense 
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (16:37) Staff: AI: Inquire with Wafa in her ccNSO liaison capacity: Justine noted that there are allegations of misuse/mismanagement of ccTLDs. What remedies are available? How are they used and how have they been used historically?
  Greg Shatan: (16:38) Much phone ringing in background.
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:38) I'd prefer 3L-TLDs only for geographical regions which does not qualify for a "polititcal" country, but could become one.
  Holly Raiche: (16:38) @ John.  Tuvalu comes to mine - it has been sold and is practically the only source of revenue for the area
  Holly Raiche: (16:39) What Lutz is suggesting is close to what Greg is proposing
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:39) I'd oppose Airport Codes or similar usage. I'd oppose ccTLD usage
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:40) I'd oppose a gouvernmental restriction (as seen for .cat, which was delegated against the Spanish inquisitoin^W)
  judith hellerstein: (16:40) .ly is also sold and used by others,best example is bit.ly
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:40) I'd oppose Public Interest. That's zu broad for me.
  Evin Erdoğdu: (16:40) Thank you @John for AI, noted.
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (16:41) :)
  Greg Shatan: (16:41) Have not yet but will.  Just formulated this during our discussion.
  Justine Chew: (16:41) Q.e7 Consensus for ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 codes to be made available for application by any relevant govt auth, or any other entities receiving the support of govt auth
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:42) Justine: Not from me
  Carlton SAMUELS: (16:42) Look, without delegation  a ISO-3166 3-letter code has no value. I would not eliminate the prospect of delegation. But to restrict it to a public benefit criterion is not  going to help. So in context, I would agree with Greg that it is removed.
  Greg Shatan: (16:42) Consensus but not full consensus.
  Yesim Nazlar: (16:43) @Justine: you have the control of the slides, now
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:43) Carlton: It's hard to belive, but there is more than the TLD usage for ISO codes.
  Evan Leibovitch: (16:44) Guess it's too late in the process to push for a moratorium on new gTLDs because the whole process is detrimental to the public interest... 
  Carlton SAMUELS: (16:45) The question of grandfathering 3-letter code delegations will take some variation on principle.  Would we recommend compensation or do they get a free pass? 
  Greg Shatan: (16:45) Evan, that’s outside the remit of WT5.
  Evan Leibovitch: (16:45) This is all just rearranging deck chairs on the titanic
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:46) Evan: As long, as it gives a good feeling and results in a nice arrangement, why not?
  Greg Shatan: (16:46) It’s not a free pass to grandfather without compensation.  It would be free money to compensate the Comoros for the use of .com.
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (16:46) That said Evan, we've been increasingly vocal about our skepticism regarding the need to use the new gTLD process after the revision is complete.
  Carlton SAMUELS: (16:46) @Evan: ..that too :-). But I take the position of my favourite congressman from Texas in this situation. "If you can't take their money, drink their liquour...etc......"
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (16:47) I see it right now as giving the engine that is the new gTLD process a tune up. Deciding to take it out on a drive is a separate question
  Carlton SAMUELS: (16:48) @Justine: The capital city thing is problematic. Do we favour the good burghers of Paris France over Paris, Texas and why?
  Evan Leibovitch: (16:48) Tune up? The tow truck is at the door.
  Justine Chew: (16:49) @Carlton: that's a second level issue
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (16:50) @evan still have to choose to hire the tow truck driver...
  Carlton SAMUELS: (16:50) My reflexive response is to answr like the Bourbon King when faced with a smilar plaint "..Am I not a Christian and a prince"?"
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (16:50) Yes agree to continue with the required letter
  Sebastien: (16:51) Because it is a Capital and part of the image of a country (compare to other cities with the same name)
  Evan Leibovitch: (16:51) I don't foresee people fighting over. canberra. ottawa or. brazilia
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:51) Calrton: Let me remind the the question of the South Korean repesentitive at the FastTrack consultation: "If we apply for .korea in korean language, will North Korea has the right toi oppose?"
  Holly Raiche: (16:51) So is the suggestion that we do not support Proposal 17?
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:52) I'd support P17
  Justine Chew: (16:52) @Holly yes
  Holly Raiche: (16:52) Thanks Justine
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:52) Yes, it makes it difficult to reserve a controverse TLD, but that's the intention.
  Carlton SAMUELS: (16:52) @Justine: Yes, this is a second level issue TOO.  When you have some time, take a look at jamaica.com; bermuda.com, barbados.com.....
  Greg Shatan: (16:53) WT5 is only concerned with TLDs.
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (16:54) jamaica.com; bermuda.com, barbados.com. are not TLDs
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:54) P17 does not make any recommentation to Paris, Whatever, because they have different ISO codes
  Greg Shatan: (16:55) This is not about ISO codes.
  Jonathan Zuck: (16:55) looks like it
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:55) So P17 has a ver narrow target
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:55) Greg: Please read PR#10
  Greg Shatan: (16:55) Target is names of capital cities. of countries and territories.
  Marita Moll: (16:55) I agree
  Greg Shatan: (16:55) I have read it many times, Lutz.  What’s your point.
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:56) It's limited to ISO codes.
  Greg Shatan: (16:56) Incorrect, Lutz
  Jonathan Zuck: (16:56) yes
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:56) So, please ignore my comments
  Holly Raiche: (16:56) I support 10 and 17
  Greg Shatan: (16:57) It’s limited to the cap cities of the countries and territories on the ISO 3166 list.
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:57) Ah, *that* is the point.
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:57) It's still narrow.
  Greg Shatan: (16:57) Agree with that, Lutz.
  Greg Shatan: (16:58) I also have a particular interest in non capital city names. :-)
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (16:59) Argee with PR#11
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (16:59) support
  Carlton SAMUELS: (17:00) @PR#11: So, um, we are applying a positive discrimination test here, is this what I'm hearing?  
  Greg Shatan: (17:01) Please mute if you are not speaking.
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:01) I disagree with PR N.11
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (17:03) Nobody is going to found a city in order to obtain or prevent a TLD
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (17:03) Abdulkarim: Why?
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (17:04) good points greg
  judith hellerstein: (17:04) I agree with greg s.
  Jonathan Zuck: (17:04) moi aussi
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (17:04) Greg: So Amazon vs Amazon shouldn't be handled not by a geographic preference?
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:05) Greg is making some of my point 
  Greg Shatan: (17:05) Lutz, at this point we are discussing only preventative measures (i.e., veto power). 
  Carlton SAMUELS: (17:06) @Greg: I agree this is a cockeyed one and here's why. I can go to bat for Springfield, St. Elizabeth, Jamaica, the place of birth of my first wife (pop 300) over Springfield, Illinois., (pop. I don't know and who cares!) One the basis I don't them fellas in Illinois.
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:07) what if an airport is built tomorrow
  Greg Shatan: (17:07) Airports are not cities.
  Greg Shatan: (17:08) One of NYC’s airports is Newark Airport, which is not even in Newark, it’s in Elizabeth, New Jersey.
  Greg Shatan: (17:09) We can certainly tighten up around primarily.  But that’s not a reason for a broad change,
  Glenn McKnight: (17:09) Toronto airport is in Mississauga
  Sebastien: (17:09) Yes but it is linked with NYC
  Sebastien: (17:09) That not the point each airport code are connected with a city
  Holly Raiche: (17:10) @ JZ - would that not be cybersquatting?
  Greg Shatan: (17:10) Is Stewart Airport in Newburgh, NY linked with NYC?
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:10) yes that seams resonable 
  Greg Shatan: (17:11) Bradley is halfway between Hartford, CT and Springfield, MA....
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:11) @Jonathan...I agree
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:11) Why cant you regulate when it is sole?
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:11) why cant you regulate after it has been sold?
  Jonathan Zuck: (17:11) we can do whatever we decide to do
  Evan Leibovitch: (17:12) What is the point of this discussion FROM THE POV OF END USERS?  Why are issues of gaming of TLDs at all relevant to the At Large mandate?
  Holly Raiche: (17:12) @ EVan - good point
  Greg Shatan: (17:12) Antitrust issues is one reason we can’t regulate.
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (17:12) subsequent cobntract revision
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (17:12) Evan: Interesting question if you ignore the end user trust to the delegation
  Greg Shatan: (17:13) I agree with Evan.  The gaming issue, which is highly speculative at best, is not really an end-user issue.
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:13) But for example buying a land for millions does not mean what is built on it would not be regulated 
  Greg Shatan: (17:13) Not all delegations are “hijackings.”
  Greg Shatan: (17:14) And “knowing about it” is not the same as being given a veto power.
  Evan Leibovitch: (17:14) @Greg.. That was one example
  Carlton SAMUELS: (17:14) @Evan: Focusing on the end user is why I used the 'Paris, Texas and Paris, France' trope. All end users are equal but some are more equal than others! 
  Marita Moll: (17:14) Sorry Greg -- maybe not the best word to use
  Evan Leibovitch: (17:15) There are many components of this debate that don't affect end users
  Justine Chew: (17:15) For WT5 please review the Google doc and add your comments - link is on the agenda page
  Jonathan Zuck: (17:15) I think that's a very important question Evan
  Marita Moll: (17:20) @Evan -- People may not care about their neighbour's names, but they sure do care about their own names
  Carlton SAMUELS: (17:20) @Greg: No comment +1
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (clo3): (17:20) Thanks Greg...
  Jonathan Zuck: (17:22) exactly, there are other watchers and we always have the empowered community powers to raise an issue
  Bastiaan Goslings: (17:22) @Greg: thank you, I agree
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (17:23) I'm kind of with Evan on this. Many, many users don't care about this TLD issue. A segment of end users do care. In a world where some end users think FB is the Internet, I suspect that the number of end users who care is only slightly larger than the number of people in the domain industry who do
  Alfredo Calderon: (17:23) Seems reasonable to not comment at this point.
  Justine Chew: (17:23) Nope, agree with Greg's recommendation
  Satish Babu: (17:23) Agree.
  Greg Shatan: (17:23) I have spoken and I am now holding my peace. :-)
  Justine Chew: (17:24) https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/alacpolicydev/pages/102661321/At-Large+Workspace+Consultation+on+Neustar+s+Proposal+for+3-Phased+New+gTLD+Application+Model
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (clo3): (17:25) I have another call starting at the half hour so apologies when I just leave suddenly, a moment or two before...
  Marita Moll: (17:25) @John -- the geonames become an issue when something goes wrong (.amazon) and this is all just an effort to avoid that, as best we can (IMHO)
  Evan Leibovitch: (17:26) @John thanks. My take on the cruel joke that is gTLD expansion is well known. But if ALAC is to participate in this joke, it ought not to waste its volunteers' valuable time and limit its deliberations to those issues that impact end users
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (17:27) @Marita -- Agreed though even there, it's more of a political football of national pride vs corporations rather than an end user issue. And we should say so.
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (17:27) "At Large is loathe to weigh-in on this issue..." :)
  Evan Leibovitch: (17:28) If only that phrase was the default...
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (clo3): (17:28) I will leave the AC and sta in audio as long as I can...  
  Yesim Nazlar: (17:29) noted Cheryl
  John Laprise (ALAC/NARALO): (17:30) Careful...you're giving me ICANN64 ideas
  Greg Shatan: (17:30) Of course, if you put .brands last, you steal their opportunities and set the stage for numerous objections and disputes.
  Evan Leibovitch: (17:30) @Marita there is nothing that ALAC could say that would prevent conflicts such as. amazon At the end of the day it's all about the money and occasionally about pride.
  Greg Shatan: (17:31) In any event, brands are not pushing this idea.  It’s coming from those who want to get money into ICANN and the domain name industry.,
  Alfredo Calderon: (17:31) I have to take care of other business. Need to leave AC.
  Yesim Nazlar: (17:31) thank you for joining Alfredo 
  A-Eduardo Diaz: (17:32) Need to move forward to another  meeting. Thnaks.
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (clo3): (17:33) Thanks Justine    Bye for now...
  Holly Raiche: (17:33) Good summary - thanks Justine
  Carlton SAMUELS: (17:34) Can I ask, is there a gneral sense that given its antecedents, what Neustar proposed is intended to advance its business interests?  Can we extract  those and decide if they are neutral or advance the end user interest?
  Joanna Kulesza: (17:35) apologies all, but I also need to leave. 
  Joanna Kulesza: (17:35) looking forward to hearing back on the Kobe polic workshop
  Greg Shatan: (17:35) I agree with Jonathan, and sorry not to say so.
  Jonathan Zuck: (17:35) ok
  Jonathan Zuck: (17:35) thanks
  Evan Leibovitch: (17:37) Quid pro quos don't work in ICANN. Any "alliance" is only as solid as their buy in to what we ask.
  Evin Erdoğdu: (17:39) Executive Summaries: ALAC Policy Comments & Advice - https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/x/r3weBg
  Carlton SAMUELS: (17:39) I'm dropping off now. Thanks for the conversations.  Bye all.
  Heidi Ullrich: (17:39) Thanks to those who commented on the At-large proces for this infographic. 
  Justine Chew: (17:39) I really like this MAD graphic!
  Greg Shatan: (17:40) MAD :-)
  Heidi Ullrich: (17:40) A Policy Development infographic was produced a few years ago. This is the same for the advisory committees. 
  Greg Shatan: (17:40) Need to drop. Bye, all!
  Glenn McKnight: (17:40) Mad magazine  image:)
  Heidi Ullrich: (17:40) Please use it for your outreach and engagement activities! 
  Greg Shatan: (17:40) What, me worry?
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:40) Good summary 
  Satish Babu: (17:40) Thanks Evin, looks good...
  Glenn McKnight: (17:41) A bit of animation would be good for the graphic
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:41) But it would be nice to see how they all link together 
  Justine Chew: (17:41) Good question, Olivier, I wasn't sure where this would go
  Heidi Ullrich: (17:41) It would be useful to place it on the At-Large web page with the policy statements
  judith hellerstein: (17:41) looks good
  Jonathan Zuck: (17:41) looks great. we can discuss next week. Thanks for this Evin (and staff!)
  Holly Raiche: (17:42) Bye for now - will add relevant comments
  Justine Chew: (17:42) Thanks Holly
  Heidi Ullrich: (17:43) All sessions will be open
  Heidi Ullrich: (17:43) the aim is to have workshop style sessions
  Heidi Ullrich: (17:44) Recall that it was agreed in Barcelona that Policy should be 80% of the discussions at f2f meetings
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (clo3): (17:44) We should rarely close a or hold caucus style meetings in a public Meeting not good form
  Jonathan Zuck: (17:44) exactly and who wojuld we exclude given everyone there fore at large is a member of the CPWG?
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:44) ealier time is prefered by me
  Marita Moll: (17:45) earlier time works best for me
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (clo3): (17:46) Works for me ( I occasionally like to break between calls
  Marita Moll: (17:46) That works for me I think
  Lutz Donnerhacke: (17:46) /me have to leave. Bye.
  judith hellerstein: (17:46) I do have a conflict 
  Kaili Kan: (17:46) Bye!
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:46) yes 19:30
  Abdulkarim Oloyede: (17:46) thanks
  Satish Babu: (17:47) Thanks and bye!
  judith hellerstein: (17:47) have an igf USA steering committee then
  Gordon Chillcott: (17:47) Thanks and bye for now.
  Evin Erdoğdu: (17:47) Thank you all, goodbye!
  Marita Moll: (17:47) Thanks everyone. Bye
  Glenn McKnight: (17:47) bye
  Evan Leibovitch: (17:47) Bye all
  Amrita: (17:47) Thank you everyone
  judith hellerstein: (17:47) bye