[gnso-dow123] Whois 1/2 tf teleconference notes 22 February 2005
[To: gnso-Dow123{at]gnso.icann.org]Attached please find a "transcript", thanks to Maria Farrell of the Whois tf 1/2 teleconference held on 22 February 2005. If there are any changes that you would like made, please let me know. 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="WHOIS Task Forces 1 and 2 minutes"-->
<!--#set var="pagetitle" value="WHOIS Task Force 1 and 2 minutes"-->
<!--#set var="pagedate" value="22 February 2005" value=""-->
<!--#set var="bgcell" value="#ffffff"-->
<!--#include virtual="/header.shtml"-->
<!--#exec cmd="/usr/bin/perl /etc/gnso/menu.pl 'WHOIS Task Forces 1 and 2
minutes'"-->
<p align="center"><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>WHOIS Task
Forces
1 and 2 Teleconference 22 February, 2005 - Minutes</b></font></p>
<p><b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">ATTENDEES:<br>
</font></b><b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">GNSO Constituency
representatives:<br>
</font></b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Registrars constituency
- Jordyn Buchanan - Co-Chair</font><b><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif"><br>
</font></b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">gTLD Registries
constituency
- David Maher </font><b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
</font></b> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> </font><font
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif">Internet Service and Connectivity Providers constituency: - Antonio
</font></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Harris</font><font
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif"> <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Intellectual Property
Interests
Constituency - Steve Metalitz <br>
Intellectual Property Interests Constituency - Niklas Lagergen </font><font
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Commercial and Business
Users
constituency - Marilyn Cade<br>
Commercial and Business Users constituency - David Fares <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Liaisons:</b><br>
At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) - Wendy Seltzer <br>
Govenrment Advisory Committee (GAC) Suzanne Sene <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>ICANN Staff </b><br>
<strong>GNSO Policy Officer</strong> - Maria Farrell<br>
Barbara Roseman <br>
<br>
<b>Absent:</b><br>
gTLD Registries constituency: - Jeff</font><b><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif"> </font></b><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif">Neuman</font><b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> -
</font></b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Co-Chair</font><b><font
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> </font>- </b><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif">apologies </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif"></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <br>
Non Commercial Users Constituency - Milton Mueller </font> <font face="Arial,
Helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font face="Arial,
Helvetica, sans-serif"> <br>
Registrars constituency - Tom Keller</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif"> </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> </font><font
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif"> </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Registrars
constituency - Paul Stahura</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif"></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif"><br>
Non Commercial Users Constituency - Milton Mueller </font> <font
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif"> </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> </font><font
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif"> </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> </font><font
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif"> Non Commercial Users Constituency - Marc Schneiders </font>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif">
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
gTLD Registries constituency: - Jeff</font><b><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif">
</font></b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Neuman</font><b><font
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
- </font></b><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif">Co-Chair</font><b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
</font>- </b><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">apologies </font><br>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Internet Service and Connectivity
Providers constituency - Maggie Mansourkia</font>-<font face="Arial,
Helvetica, sans-serif">
apologies</font> <br>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Intellectual Property Interests
Constituency
- Jeremy Banks</font><br>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Intellectual Property Interests
Constituency
- Steve Metalitz </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font> <br>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC)
liaisons - Thomas Roessler - apologies <br>
<b>GNSO Secretariat:</b> Glen de Saint Géry - absent - apologies <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Agenda: </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 1. How to move forward <br>
2. Discuss invitations to expert groups for call on 1 March<br>
<br>
<strong>Jordyn Buchanan </strong><br>
Agenda point on moving forward on conspicuous notice and local law provisions.
There was a council meeting last Thursday where our work was discussed and
council provided some advice on how to move forward – some structural
changes but it goes with what I’ve seen on the mailing list. Some of the
other people on the call were on the council call so they can say if I’ve
missed anything. It’s been recommended that we do two things. One to
codify or report on the work we’ve done to date on the various topics
where we’ve drawn to a conclusion. That would be with regard to both
writing up a summary of the previous task forces work which may be extracting
various pieces – we’ll see how to do that – and that segues
into the recommendations we’ve put together as a task force and how they
were accepted by various constituencies. That will be put into a document with
the local law piece. Council says TF3 has basically stalled out and so the work
they’ve done to date will be incorporated into that report. Staff will
work closely with the two chairs as well as with Bruce Tonkin to bring that
about. Going forward we’ll put together an intense series of meetings
over the next month to move forward on tiered access. The suggestion was made
to do two meetings a week with one meeting where we’re joined by guests
to discuss various topics – next week we’ll have some – and
it was also suggested that ? and groups like that can give input . and the
other calls will be devoted to dialogue between the various task force members
with the goal of having moved forward on the tiered access piece in time for
the Argentina meeting. Anyone with any questions or comments, bring them
forward.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <strong>Steve Metalitz</strong>
<br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">I understood second hand on
the call that ?? why do only intensive work on this task force’s area.
We’ve produced something in this task force and have recommendations in
the pipeline that we’re pushing forward and that’s where attention
should be focused. In terms of two meetings a week, our problem is not
quantity, it’s quality and it’s not realistic to expect people to
give up that much time over the next few weeks. It’s most important to
have agendas sent out in advance and that would be more productive than
devoting three hours to these calls.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <strong>Jordyn</strong> <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Your point on TF3’s work
is taken. My understanding from the council call discussion – which
wasn’t highly interactive, and different people may have different
understandings of what Bruce Tonkin recommended – but some people were
under the impression that TF 3’s work would be part of our work for the
next </font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">f</font><font
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">ew weeks but I thought we’d be
focused on tiered access.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <strong>Nick lagergren <br>
</strong></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Agreement on the
basis of TF 3 as had been discussed and agreed at the breakfast meeting in Cape
Town and we shouldn’t leave that aside.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <strong>Jordyn</strong>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> TF3 is being merged in and those
issues would have to be worked on at some point. Did others have thoughts about
two meetings a week? Everyone likes the idea? Is it a problem for anyone else?
(silence) Based on that, we – I agree with your point Steve that we want
quality as well – but to the extent that we want to have outside
presentations made to the task force, it’s difficult to imagine having
several of those and being able to have substantive dialogue over the next few
weeks without having additional meetings in the schedule. But we don’t
need to schedule two meetings a week for the sake of it so we’ll take
suggestions. </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">– make one meeting a week
and have it a little longer.</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
<br>
- is the problem about length of time or two different time slots? <br>
-
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">If we were able to get these
presentations going, it might make sense to schedule some additional
meetings.<br>
-
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">From my perspective, three
hours a week is difficult. (David Fares)</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <strong>Jordyn</strong> <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The only presentations
we’ve discussed concretely to date are people who’ve implemented or
have a concrete plan to implement a tiered access system and we’re on
track to have that presentation next week. The other is to have registrars that
operate proxy services to discuss their services with us. We may combine those
two into one meeting. The other type of effort we’ve discussed in the
past is bringing in some security and stability input. Bruce thinks that might
be a useful thing and that might be another meeting to discuss the security
community – to the extent that it exists – the security
community‘s viewpoint on these issues.</font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jordyn</strong><br>
so I think what I’m getting is that we want to minimize the changes or
increase to the schedule that might happen but part of these presentations
might be reasonable to add some special meetings for these presentations. Any
other comments on the general philosophy of codifying, not codifying but
summarizing into a report the recommendations we have to date, and on consent
and local law issues. </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Steve </strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Will moving ahead in the
policy process be part of the recommendations. </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jordyn</strong>:</font>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
We need to do some of that work anyway in terms of doing a report for the
council so we would move ahead on both. </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Steve</strong> <br>
They’re at different stages. <br>
<br>
<strong>Jordyn </strong><br>
Yes. Essentially the idea is to create a factual report. And if we decided as a
task force that we were ready to gather the recommendations in relation to
local laws then we could include or modify anything on that at the time of the
report. <br>
<strong><br>
Steve </strong><br>
On recommendation 1? Where do these fit in the process? <br>
<br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jordyn </strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">My understanding is we put
together a report on the overall work we’ve done and we present that to
the council. If you think it’s important that the report be presented and
include constituency statements on the second recommendations. A report on the
status of the work to date regardless of whether it includes the constituency
statements </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Marilyn Cade ( Joining
the call) </strong></font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jordyn </strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It can include constituency
statements and feedback and is a factual report on the current status of the
work . </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Steve</strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Looking ahead…….
Every time we move ahead in the process, someone suggests we make a right turn
or cul de sac. First we have the staff holding up the process. Now we have the
council holding up the process. Don’t you think we should follow the PDP
as our first obligations? Sounds to me as if recommendation 1 should overlap
considerably. </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jordyn </strong><br>
I’m not sure why it’s – the PDP does require a report to be
created. <br>
<br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Steve</strong> <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">I would move that the staff
create the report and present it to us at the next meeting.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <strong>Barbara</strong> <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Perhaps by next week Maria can
present an outline but trying to do it in one week is too much. But she can
have a broad outline and some of the details worked out. </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jordyn </strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We have a schedule for next
week ( week 7 to 12 March 2004) anyway so the week after next is more
realistic. </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Marilyn </strong><br>
Would be good for Maria to take a crack and ask questions about it in a 20
minute slot next week (I March 2005.) <br>
<br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jordyn </strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Worried about adding items.
Maria to email the outline to the list and ask for feedback and guidance from
the task force by email. </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Barbara</strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">That’s reasonable
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Steve </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> With regard to recommendation 2,
the question for us is whether we should<br>
a) send it out for constituency statements or <br>
b) not do so and continue to try to arrange a meeting next week <br>
a another option to consider is the ombudsman who took office recently but
seems to be well suited to that. </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jordyn </strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So that seems to me Steve that
we can proceed – its certain that we could take under advisement the
letter we’ve already received from the staff, and maybe having further
interactive dialogues – but you’re right, to the extent that
we’re having problems getting attention from the staff that we consider
how long that process might take. </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Marilyn</strong> <br>
I don’t think we ought to go out for a constituency vote unless we have
something real for them to vote on. So I recommend the other approach and see
how long it would take to contact he ombudsman, and have a look at where we
are. You were thinking it would take a long time to get a ruling on it? <br>
<br>
<strong>Jordyn </strong><br>
I don’t know how long it will take. We don’t need a ruling, we need
our issue resolved. I’m not opposed to it if we think it’s
premature to go to the constituencies at this point. Any other thoughts or
comments? <br>
<br>
<strong>David Maher</strong><br>
I support the ombudsman approach to help us try to understand the staff
concerns before we move forward. <br>
<br>
<strong>Jordyn</strong> <br>
It seems there’s not a lot of support for moving forward without some
dialogue with the staff so we’ll go ahead and initiate the ombudsman and
see what happens. <br>
<br>
It was
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> proposed that Jordyn and Jeff
look on the ombudsman’s home page and make contact immediately.
</font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jordyn</strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Hopefully we’ll have
some other status than we just submitted it. In the next day or two we’ll
submit it and have seen what’s needed to submit the request. <br>
OK so we have our way forward for issue number 2. the staff will be working
with us on the report for issues number 1 and 2. We will be merging task force
3 in with the current 1 and 2 and next week we will start our calls with tiered
access providers, even though some of their proposals have never been
implemented. <br>
<br>
The two lists will be merged
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
Bruce Tonkin has requested that we might consider adjusting our call times so
they’re more convenient for those in the Asia Pacific region, and
that’s the evening for those in Europe . Does anyone have thoughts?
</font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Marilyn </strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">My understanding was that the
group was going to have join the task forces and he would fulfil his
obligations there. I don’t think he’ll participate in the long run.
But I’m not interested, we’re not having the chair being there all
the time, just for a few weeks till we get to mar del plata . </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Day would remain the
same, Tuesday. New call time proposed 2:00 pm EST (19:00 UTC)
</strong></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Steve </strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have no problem in general
though may not participate next week. </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
<strong>Jordyn</strong> <br>
Europeans are most affected. And Asia Pacific. Maybe there’s a way to
stagger the call so Bruce is able. We’ll move to the 2pm time slot and
see if there’s a dramatic drop off, but we’ll accommodate
Bruce’s schedule in the run up to mar del plata .</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <strong>Marilyn</strong>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Did you talk yet about what
you’ll do in mar del plata. </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jordyn</strong> <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">No, we talked about the staff
producing the report as discussed on the council call, and about a slightly
more aggressive meeting schedule. The compromise we settled on was that to the
extent that we have presentations on certain weeks, we’ll schedule extra
meetings in those weeks. Having one listening and one participating meeting a
week will be too much for some task force members.</font></p>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Marilyn</strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Council will meet in mar del
plata with the liaison group with the GAC. In the past we had a problem that we
had only an hour but we have an hour and a half to two hour time slot. Still
working on it. Bruce proposed we have a set of current working papers on each
side to facilitate non-English speakers, to discuss progress and priorities. We
hadn’t figured out how we’re going to do any such papers,
they’ll probably be extremely high level like bullet points. WHOIS will
be discussed. We’ll continue to have WHOIS in the public forum and also
other topics in the public forum as well. We were hoping to have a face to face
working session between the council and the task force like we did last time
specific to whois .</font>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <strong>Briefing material for
the Mar del Plata meeting: <br>
suggestion that Bruce Tonkin prepares some with Jeff and
Jordyn</strong></font> </p>
<p><strong><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Jordyn
</font></strong><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
We can look forward to having some perhaps presentation at the forum. That
would be my taking there are <br>
not necessarily any specific action items. </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Task Force attendees in
Mar del Plata </strong></font></p>
<p> <strong><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Jordyn Buchanan, David
Maher, Tony Harris, Niklas Lagergren, Frannie Wellings,
,David Fares?? </font> </strong></p>
<p><strong><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> J ordyn
</font></strong></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Right, will be a broad set of
meetings, like our joint meeting with council will be a good opportunity to be
very productive. Seems to me like we’ve got the right set of meetings. We
may want to revisit that in a week or two, when we see what our report is
looking like and we see if there’s progress on tiered access or action
items. OK we’ll plan that, but we at least have consent for the planned
activities at mar del plata . I don’t have anything else from the agenda
today. It’s been fairly administrative but it’s given us fairly
clear … on the two topics. One question on the tiered access piece.
We’ll have the two presentations next week. Are there any other experts
we should have?</font></p>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jordyn</strong><br>
I believe we have confirmation from .name and Network Solutions who I’m
still trying to schedule. We just changed the time so I’m re-checking. A
couple of registrars who have proxy services will come if we have time during
that call. The registrars I’ve talked to so far were Godaddy and E-Nom
who are task force members. </font>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Marilyn </strong><br>
I would like us not to use the task force members to do presentations if we can
avoid it. It puts them in a difficult situation. Are we putting them in a
difficult position if they’re the only sources of information we have on
this topic. They have another job to do as well. </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <strong>Jordyn</strong><br>
I understand. They volunteered on a previous call . network solutions
aren’t presenting for example. I think there’s obviously provides a
services but Godaddy represent a pretty large chunk and we would want to have
another one too. </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Marilyn</strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">I’d like to do that and
I thought we’d agreed that. We should have a conversation with the SSAC
(?) and I think there’s a growing examination that we may want to have in
the first round on what else do we need to do, more understanding is better.
Definitely we should have SSAC, and we’ve mentioned .ca. </font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jordyn </strong><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes, we’d like to have
them and I’ll get back to you. So I want to also schedule the chair of
the SSAC as well as any other as he’d be good to present on security
aspects of WHOIS and maybe tiered access. </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Those will be the only sessions
for input unless anyone has suggestions. <br>
<strong><br>
Next week <br>
1 March 2005 Presentations <br>
<br>
Following week <br>
8 March 2005<br>
- the update <br>
- report from staff <br>
- revisit what to do in mar del plata <br>
<br>
The call on 1 March 2005 will be transcribed and a MP3 recording
made.<br>
<br>
Jordyn Buchanan thanked all the participants for attending.<br>
Call ended at 17:05 UTC </strong></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Thanks to Maria, the call
was practically transcribed.</strong></font></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><br>
Next Call:</b> <b>19 October 2004<br>
see: </b><a href="http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/";>GNSO
calendar</a></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><br>
<br>
</b></font></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
|