 share the screen with my, with the, let me see, hold on a second, share the screen. Everybody can see the screen? Yeah, I'm probably, I'm probably leaking a lot of information, but you know, basically don't care. So the first order of business is the anti-toss policy the Code of Conduct. And that was policy, the Linux Foundation wants us to be aware that we could be competitors, but no collusion or price, no anti-competitive behavior. That is the only requirement you have to join the call. The other item here is the Code of Conduct, which says that we treat each other with respect and civility, even when we are disagreeing with people. And that can happen, obviously, but when we, when we disagree, we do it in a respectful way. These are the only two requirements to join the call. Now, we can go through introductions. There are 10 participants and some of whom seem to be new. So, so again, the introductions are going to should be very short, like 10, 15 seconds are the most. And if you do not want to introduce yourself, that's also fine. But the introduction should consist of what you're working on, why you are here, and what can you contribute, or what are you going to take away from this? So, I start with Tony Bellin. Hey, can you guys hear me? Yes. Yeah, I'm fairly joining because I'd like to learn more about hyperledger fabric in particular. And I've gotten my a little bit of my chops up on Python, but I know a lot of things are written on go. And I'm just looking to learn as much as I can about the fabric process. And I don't know if where or if I can contribute, but that's something I'll be looking forward to do at some point. So, so before we go any further, let's be very clear about what this group is. It's identity working group and hyperledger. Obviously, we deal with many of the hyperledger frameworks, including fabric. But normally, we do not go into details on technical stuff. Okay, there are there are many other meetups or meetings and other working groups, channels and so on, which are dedicated solely to fabric. And you can join them too. But in case you're interested in identity, which is, of course, a foundational topic in blockchains, because without identity, there is nothing else. Right. So that's that's our focus. Okay, to set the levels that the expectations that you might have. So mostly, this is people who are either working directly on the identity space, or we are discussing things that are happening and our hot topics in identity. And then we tie it back to blockchain to see whether these laws regulations today's focus will be on data protection regulations. So how are they going to impact us? That is one of the main focus here. And our paper contains links to things like fabric implementation and identity implementation and how fabric differs, let's say from sawtooth, or there are pure identity solutions like Indy in in our in our frameworks. And then, you know, we have the Ethereum variants, Bezu and Borough. So we talk about a lot of different different ways of handling identity. But most of them, ultimately, are, you know, related to, let's say, asymmetric cryptography. Anyway, going right along, the next person is Alfonso Govella. Thank you, Big Team. I'm Alfonso Govella from Mérida, Mexico. I'm a consultant for urban innovation and blockchain at Metropolis, which is a league of major cities. We founded Blockchain Mérida and Hyperledger Mérida Meetup Groups. And my interest is to learn more about the resource of identity to use it in public public sector and social impact. Thank you. Great. So you probably will be very interested in IoT identity delegation and so on, which are going to be the topics in the coming weeks. We want to focus on those in the coming weeks. And then we have Ankita. Yeah, hi. Thanks, Vibhan. Hello, everyone. This is Ankita, working on identity solution with Ironworks Technologies. And we are using Hyperledger areas, of course, and Indy's tech. And I'm looking forward to explore more in this space and integrating this identity. You keep dropping out anyway. Hello, am I audible? Yes, but you keep dropping off maybe because you're pressing the mute button. Oh, I guess. Yeah, is it okay? Yes, sorry. Don't worry about it. So, yeah. Okay. I'm working with Ironworks Technologies and mainly working on identity solution using Ares and Hyperledger Indy's tech. And looking forward to explore more on this data protection and on the other use cases. Dan. Thank you. Is that Dan Bakunamar? Do you want me to... Yeah, just a short introduction. I know who you are, but not the others. Yeah, so Dan Bakunamar here. I'm with Accenture Digital Identity Team. The highlight for me today is I'm in Davos, Switzerland at the World Economic Forum. We just did a briefing on known travel with digital identity, which is a decentralized identity, speed news and Hyperledger Indy. And yeah, that's March 15th. Maybe you could tell us in the coming weeks what happened at Davos with respect to identity. I have a feeling that maybe even Ruben is in Davos or somebody else is in Davos. Everybody who's anybody is in Davos, but we are not there. Yeah, happy to report out. I know Brian Belendorf is here. I've been in a couple of meetings with him. You're the head of the Hyperledger Foundation. But yeah, happy to talk to you offline about scheduling some time. Yeah, great. John? Hi, I'm John Callahan. I go by Jack. I'm the CTO of Viridian. And I know many of the people on the call. Dan, wonderful that you're dialing in from Davos. That's fantastic. So thanks for taking the time. And Callahan from Ironworks, another sovereign steward. We're a sovereign founding steward as well. And I haven't joined this call before, but the topics, particularly on biometrics, have hit my radar screen. And I'm delighted to participate. Thank you. So Dan is the expert on biometrics. And hopefully he will make a presentation on that particular topic with respect to ISO variations. I think it's 307 on biometrics and the link to some of the NIST guidance on identity proofing and so on. Yeah, I agree, Vipin. And I forgot to mention that I'm also the author on the Callahan knows this on the Hyperledger Aries biometric service provider. Great. So we have at least a few experts on biometrics here. Now let's go down the list and get it. Callahan? Yeah. Thanks, Vipin. This is Callahan. I am the CEO for Ironworks. We have been focused on identity space from last two years now. And being working really on the Aries stack as well. We are also contributing to the frameworks. As Jack rightly mentioned, we are kind of collaborating with this group and lots of changes happening, which are positive in terms of the identity, getting more and more highlights and importance with the various rules and acts coming out. So looking forward to knowing more about these. Yeah. Thank you. Thanks, Vipin. Paolo, I'm not calling on you, Kelly, because you normally, when you're taking notes, you do not want to. Okay. I'm Paolo Campeggiani from Italy. I work for BitFreddy, which is a digital identity provider. But here I'm especially because also it happens that I am the project leader for the new technical report on the existing DLT system for identity management that the working group two of the ISOTC 307 standardization committee is a task to do this year. Beautiful. I mean, I mean, to understand what's the current status of India and especially how things are progressing. Yeah. I mean, they have indie implementation. I mean, we have the identity working group implementation calls on Thursday that may be more you know, they have much more detail on the actual implementations, including indie areas and so on. So that that might be a good call to join for you. Okay, thanks. Thanks for pointing these out. Yeah, but you can, you can, you know, hopefully you will find us interesting enough. And you will, you know, you can contribute in a generic sense to the general direction. Roland? Hi, yes. Yeah, I'm Ruben. I work on identity stuff since four years of work at consensus. I have I'm one of the people who started U-Port, which is one of the stuff on identity troops out there. I also lead the EA. So it's your enterprise alliance identity working groups. So I'm here mainly to see where we can work together. And like, I think there's a bunch of stuff, which is actually very interrelated and not specific to any chain anyway. And I'm the ED for the Decentred Foundation, which is more of an industry effort to line our work towards standards on building the IP sense identity systems across blockchains, across technologies, and so on. And so Ruben is a rock star here because he's the leader of the identity stuff. Stuff is meaning U-Port, DIF, EEA, and so on. And lately I've been given a observer status in EEA. So I hope to join the identity working group calls as well. And Ruben is also proposed something along the lines of the personal data stores. There was a cross collaboration meeting between the various parties that was basically to talk about data stores that are under the control of the subject. And they are called different things in different frameworks, but they are all similar. They converge to a similar set of problems. And we had sent out a note about that about their meetings. And Ruben is in the process of creating a DIF-based working group to collaborate on this, I think. Yes. The idea is, I think there are different communities, as I mentioned, within Hyperledger, within DIF, as well as within W3C. So the idea is to create the working group within DIF because we have all the legal frameworks in place to then transfer the work once it becomes more formalized into DIF or ITF for other basis. So the DIF is more like the earlier stage place where we want to very engineering-driven develop standards or emerging specs, whilst W3C and ITF are places where it's really great to then mature these and make this as global standard. So that's kind of how we want to collaborate together. And we are working on the proposal, how the collaboration could look like in specific on this topic between W3C and ITF. So that's working progress. Yes. And since DIF is a member organization, this, I assume, will be a member only sort of situation, or is it going to be more open to people like us who do not have memberships? Yeah, it's likely to be as open as we did with DITCOM. So DITCOM is another initiative which actually incubated within the Hyperledger Ares community. It's about the secure messaging between DIDs, between identities in the centralized space. And we just launched the working group in the beginning of the year within DIF, have members from Hyperledger Ares as well as DIF and work members together. And here as well, we allow individuals to join and for companies who made it also easier. We're still like defining the model for going forward. But it was one of the requirements for the storage topic to be as well open for collaboration. There's only one limitations we just need to put in places. People need to sign certain IP. And yes, documents to make sure that all contributions are without any like patent claims or any other things because we want to make sure that it can be used without any restrictions across the ecosystem. Yeah, this is a hot topic even here in Hyperledger because we use DCO sign off. But then it doesn't tie back to real identity sometimes. And you know, there's all kinds of legal issues related to that. So as you can see, that is related to identity. And how can you prove that you are authorized to sign off on a piece of code, especially if you haven't authored it yourself? You might have copied it from somewhere, you might have taken some material from somewhere else, you know, that kind of stuff. So this, this is a very interesting topic for us. I only see one more person who didn't, who didn't, that was the moment. Hello, and there was another person, Rohit. So please Roland, go ahead. And then after that, Rohit. I guess Roland is silent. So I think Rohit, you should go ahead if you can get yourself off mute. Hello, this is Rohit. And I'm working with the ironworks as a blockchain developer. Hello. And I'm working on a hyper-legality. Thank you. So I think without further, you know, going around, beating around the bush, people always ask me, why do you spend so much time in introductions? Why? Because it really brings out what people are working on. And like, for example, we had a mini discussion with Ruben, for example, on this, you know, on the topic of collaboration on didcom and personal data stores, or whatever you want to call them, hubs. Anyway, so this is the main motivation behind going into slightly elaborate introductions. Now, this brings us to the purpose and the motive behind Identity Working Group. And so I'm going to go into a little bit here for the roadmap. And I can show you that the roadmap that we have, you know, I shared some of it last week. Basically, I mean, can everybody see this? Hello? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So obviously to build a community, which is what we are doing with introductions and so on and so forth. And the work products, there is a white paper being worked on, but it's been worked on for years, because the topic seems to go on endlessly. There isn't collaboration within a couple of, you know, it's very difficult to get something like this done, unless you have dedicated personnel, and we are all volunteers. And the other aspect is presentations. And then we can align using mailing list, Zoom, Prokachad, Wiki, and conferences, which are either a mix of asynchronous methods, meaning you don't have to be on a call or everybody. At the same time, you can actually collaborate. And also getting the knowledge from different groups into hyperledger, like we just talked about the W3C and the grid working group, which is a members only thing. And if IW rebooting Web of Trust, the ISO 307 work that Dan and the other gentlemen Paolo are doing, all of this helps us to focus on identity you know, the concerns around identity that are happening everywhere else. So I had put in a brief timeline, but you know, basically, this is just a suggestion. Anybody has any particular suggestion, they can put it there. We are collaborating with the supply chain SIG to make a presentation on SSI and supply chain use cases. I hope it is going to be John Jordan and or Drummond who is going to come and talk about this. And the presentations are going to be, we have already had a presentation on the California Customer Privacy Act. Then today we are going to talk about data protection regulations all around the world, and also in the United States. The state of identity, which I call it because Kim Cameron is the elder statesman on this topic and he will be presenting on February 5th. I call the state of identity because he's got a very comprehensive view of what's going on everywhere. This week he's in Japan, so he couldn't join us, but he's going to be listening to the recording. Then we're going to go to the IOT topic, the identity of IOTs which we briefly touched upon with respect to the state, you know, to the city, the smart city kind of initiatives that gentlemen Paolo was, or not Paolo, the guy from Merida was talking about. Then we're also going to do something on gladianship with respect to the sovereign paper. There are several experts here. Kelly was participating in that and so was Drummond. I think Drummond is busy today, so that's why he's not on the call. And I have scheduled some tentative presentations for the rest of the year. I am happy to take any sort of suggestions. I also created the identity working group, the TSC report, which is on the link. And if you guys, which is here, and if you guys want to make any suggestions on that, that would be great because we are supposed to, every quarter, submit a report to the Technical Steering Committee. It's turned into a little bit of a box-ticking exercise, but you know, that's where we are. Now, Ruby Kondt was supposed to talk about the personal data protection laws that were recently launched in India. And he said he couldn't make it, so I am going to talk about the privacy laws across the world with an aside on the state laws of United States. I've collected a bunch of material here, and I have it here. Somebody is putting up stuff on chat, looks like, let me see what they are saying. Okay, Ruben is gone, so that's that. Now, I'm going to go to the top of the and do a presentation. You can see my screen, though, right? I hope. So, I'm going to talk about the state of data protection regulations around the world, and the aim in talking about all this is because we can extract some kind of patterns, pattern in the regulation, and then see how we can adopt the implementation in a blockchain to come up with ways to deal with this. There are some challenges, and I think some of the main challenges we'll talk about when we talk about the actual laws. So, why is this a problem today? Because there were no data protection regulations, really nothing, and that caused basically people to do whatever the hell they wanted. The enterprises sucked up all the data and they monetized it. Surveillance capitalism became a big thing, and people found out soon enough that the emergent effects of this sort of behavior led to all kinds of bad effects, including subversion of democracy, which is the biggest effect so far, but it could include things like social credit scoring, various other ways in which this unregulated state of affairs has led to a complete destruction of privacy. And then, of course, there were a lot of people who came. Actually, there were a couple of people, especially in Europe, who started a campaign against this sort of unregulated data collection, and that has led us to this particular situation because the regulation was written by legislators, mostly lawyers, mostly people who have very little exposure to true technology. So obviously, these regulations are meant to be technology neutral, but unfortunately, that has resulted in overreach. This is the usual pattern. There is no regulation, there is abuse, then there is the regulatory pendulum swings the other way, and both of these extremes are bad for us. But this is what led us to this situation, and some of the laws are similar to basically the data not leaving the country, for example, data localization laws which can be tantamount to saying even people cannot leave the country. So what happens if somebody commits a crime and then flees to another country? There are extradition laws between countries sometimes that allow for that situation to be rectified. Maybe there should be data extradition laws, I don't know. But nobody talks about this. None of the data protection regulations talk about this because they just want to keep the data in the country so that they have complete control over it. They do not have to ask some other country to say, what is the data about my citizens that are residing in your country? And this is obviously happening also because of things like the cloud, things like what's happening all over the place. So this state of affairs has resulted in more and more countries adopting comprehensive data protection on privacy laws. So there is somebody who tracks this, and I will show you in the next slide what that is. 130 countries have adopted this, and 40 more countries have pending bills. So what do they cover? Personal information held in both electronic and physical form and to all or nearly all subject areas, which means like both private companies as well as government collection of data. And most of them have proposed independent data protection or independent information commission that is nationwide along with requirements for companies to have data protection officers. There are exemptions to this law, which include national right to information and other legal sort of pathways to retain the data even after the customer says they do not want the data retained. Now I've been talking quite a bit, so I want to hear from you guys what, you know, if this is useful or not, what is, what should we be talking about. I'll go to the next slide, which gives a sort of overview. So in the meantime, I would love to hear more from people on the call about the data protection and privacy laws that are happening in their own country and others. I guess it's go ahead. Somebody wants to say something they can go ahead and say. Well, hey, then. So I'm a United States citizen, and I know that a lot of the discussion around this sort of area got sparked with the GDPR, the European Union's GDPR, and California in particular with the CCPA did something similar to but not quite the same as the GDPR. And it's just really learning the differences between the two scopes. And I know, you know, those aren't necessarily the models to follow, but since they've already been established, it's like, well, that's kind of what has been established already. So we'll kind of work off of that. That's my understanding of, you know, data rights, identity, and how it all kind of plays in using those as kind of benchmarks to go off of. Yeah. So if you look at this particular map, it shows that the U.S. no initiatives or no information. Why? Because the lack of a federal law for privacy, right? That's why U.S. and Alaska are shown in white, these two areas. Now, we also have a white in China. But I know that China's wants to or has already a privacy law. And nobody knows what that privacy law is. I would try to look at the translations of that privacy law. So you have in China, for example, you have this schizophrenia, right? You have on the one hand, people wanting to protect the privacy. On the other hand, there's mass surveillance. There is, you know, credit social credit scoring. There is cameras everywhere. Now they can recognize people. They can do all kinds of things. They can also the physical location, you know, your physical location is no longer private. So all of this stuff is happening. But in terms of the U.S., I'm going to go into the state by state comparison. And we did have a presentation on CCPA here last week. And you can see the CCPA slides with the differences between GDPR and CCPA. They may not be as well laid out, but that's the beginning. And we want to put in those differences. So what happens if you're developing a global blockchain platform with collaborators scattered across the globe? How do you implement cross-jurisdictional or, you know, jurisdictional specific jurisdictions? How do you implement these protections? You know, these are all... Go ahead. Yes. But what's the scope of this conversation? Because now you invoke blockchain. So the answer to your question could be as simple as don't put any private information on the blockchain, including private dins. So it's really important to understand what the scope of the conversation is. Well, yeah, so we had in our write-up on the identity working group, we have said that PII is not to be put on the blockchain, right? And how do you segregate that into a data store that is localized, first of all. Second, that can be accessed by whoever is authorized to access it. That's the second thing. The third is, it is not just the PII that is protected. It's the transaction information. It is metadata. So if we go into the, you know, next one, we're going to go into the privacy, law, comparisons, or state comprehensive, you know. I understand your question, which is why, you know, this is a very wide scope topic. And why are we, you know, where do we draw the line? Don't we have to talk about something very concrete with respect to hyperledger technologies rather than talking about, you know, data protection and privacy laws across the world or across all the states of the United States? Yeah, yeah, you're getting it. Like you said, there's no federal privacy laws in the US, but there are. Every federal entity has to do privacy impact assessments and have system of record notices, but it has absolutely nothing to do with blockchain. It certainly has everything to do with personal data. But again, it's what is the scope of the conversation. If it's around distributed ledger technologies, the way you have privacy protection and the way you comply with GDPR is you don't put any PII on chain, including private bids. Yeah, sure. But what happens if you put transactions on the blockchain and somehow somebody can link your identity to those transactions that you conducted? Right, then the support design, but that's the discussion then. Then the scope of the discussion in distributed ledger technologies, if you're going to audit transactions on the ledger, have transaction IDs that either cannot be or suit anonymously linked to an identity. In terms of metadata, as GDPR states, any information that can be used to uniquely identify an individual's personal identifiable information. If that metadata can be used to personally identify an individual, A, it shouldn't be on the ledger, and B, if it is, you're just not following best practices. Okay, so the ledger becomes a repository of pure proofs and hashes, right? With that view. Well, proofs, yes. Now hashes becomes, this is still, last night checked, what is it? Workgroup 29 in the EU for GDPR. They're saying probably that hashes of data is still PII. Certainly encrypted data should not be put on chain. Hashes, it's arguable. Even with salted hashes, mathematicians may say that's almost impossible to reverse engineer. I think the privacy lawyers are still debating it. So Accenture's policies, whatever that's worth, is because there's a gray area, don't even do it. Don't put even hashes of PII on chain. Okay, so you have other systems that will do the identity proofing, PII storage, and so on and so forth, and of course those have to follow all of the... Those are identity management systems which are covered under ISO SE 27, not ISO SE 3 or TCE 307. Yeah, so SE 27 being security and identity management systems. All right, so are they currently safe? With all the hacks in the news and breaches in the news, I would have to say no, but that's probably due to either insider threats or poor implementation, right? But again, it's not a DLT thing unless you scope it into the discussion. Well, I mean, the whole point is that we are talking about DLT being a system of record for transactions somehow. I mean, whether it's directly accessible, which is obviously a bad idea, or somehow hidden, like for example in Korda, it's a bilateral system. So obviously the transactions are visible to the Korda parties who are on the transaction, but not to anyone else. Now, how do you then remove the... If there is a right of erasure, then how do you remove that stuff? These will have a direct impact on the adoption of distributed ledgers. Right, so you're absolutely right. So then I think the answer to the question is what we want to focus on is what's written to the ledger, including transaction audits, and what should those transaction audits be comprised of? And if there's PII, what about associating transactions to PII? And I know there's been some discussions in Indi, like your example with Korda. They're all, when it's done correctly, let's say, implemented based on best practices. Again, there's pair-wise pseudonymous channels between the service requester and the service provider. And those two know the relationship, similar to FIDO, once that channel is established. Just like FIDO, you could have a different did for every interaction with that service provider. So they don't know it's the same person because it's a private did. You could have thousands of private dids for one service provider. And that's why I thought the discussion was going to be about how do you have privacy protection on the ledger? Will you use private dids and don't use the same private did even within the service providers? Yeah, I mean, that is a proposal from Indi. But in the end, if you have a verifier, you have to expose data to the verifier. And the verifier has a right to copy that data, right, in a way. I mean, first of all, they have to know, you're going to a verifier who's just a service provider for some service. And you're right that you can de-link the issuer from the verifier. Fine, using these techniques. Now, and on the ledger, will be, you know, whatever is available to make that the pairwise did conversation much more private. But in the end, that service provider is capturing your data and associating it with a person because they're providing your service. You're going to a doctor, the doctor knows who you are. I mean, you know, definitely, definitely. But that's where, you know, so if the let's say a bank or whatever doctor using your example is a service provider, what's, you know, where if the scope of our conversations, have you protect crack on chain, you know, in the DLT? And how do you, you know, ensure that privacy and security? That's one thing. Now, as soon as I give through a pairwise pseudomist or that connection you talked about in quarter, as soon as I then with informed consent share my information with the service provider, boom, then then we're off chain. We're now in a different domain, but that's any identity management domain. You know, that's what I'm trying to say. Which has been shown to be a rife with problems, which has been shown to have to leak lots and lots of information. In fact, some of the greatest breaches have been because of that. But anyway, we will try to link it back to blockchain in this way that, you know, that we have these patterns, which is what I'm going to go to in the next couple of slides, right? This is the privacy law comparison with the different, for the different states. And as you can see, California and Nevada and Maine have assigned privacy law laws that are that are similar in many ways to GDPR. And then go to the law, say, you know, there's personal data critical, transaction and metadata, and they all have different levels of, you know, supposedly different levels of obfuscation or protection. Then, you know, you have the data localization, data breach notification, erasure, and all these rights, which are going to the next slide where there are two particular things that we talk about. One is the consumer rights. Consumers have access right to access to the collected data, to the shared data, to rectification, to deletion, to restriction, to portability, and all this stuff. But not all the laws have the same views on every one of these topics. In fact, there is a comparison here, which shows you in terms of state laws, I am sure you can find the same comparison between the sovereign laws passed across the world, the same sort of difference in the protection, like in the California case, for example, you can opt out and you're opted in by by default. Default. Yeah. Then again, you know, the intersection of AI and consumer data, which is solely automated decision making. California does not have protections for that. Some other state like Massachusetts seems to have, like, right here. Sorry. You know, so there are certain headings, you know, if you go back to the DPR, this consumer rights and then business obligations, all of them are present in one form or the other in the laws, but some laws do not protect specific, you know, specific items. So what do we do as implementers? So we can either punt it completely onto the other side and say, you know, it's all going to be implemented in identity and access management systems. And we only function as the glue to this. So each of these, like, for example, if the customer wants to access to collected data, and they ask for it, that probably can be put to put as a proof in the blockchain saying like, you know, somebody did ask this data to be collected to get access to the collected data or to the shared data or, you know, they wanted to do rectification or they did opt out. I mean, how do you put that in there? Or how do you put that in a shared ledger so that we can access it in some off chain system properly? And with guaranteed privacy, obviously, there have been lots of, you know, lots of recommendations using cryptography, multi-party computations, zero knowledge proves, you know, there's a whole plethora of these things. So I think what we have to do is go into each one, you know, yes, we have to, like Dan says, we have to talk about what is stored in the ledger, what is not stored in the ledger. I mean, why do we even need a ledger, for example, you know, if you don't store anything there, we don't store the links, if you don't store anything there, then what good is a ledger? The accumulator and transaction on it. To do accumulation. Right, the accumulator keeps track of valid verifiable credentials and revoked verifiable credentials. Yeah, so we'll have a presentation on this, you know, we have had several presentations on SSI and DIDS and all that. And I think we have come to a point where those technologies have grown quite a bit. And the thought around those technologies have grown quite a bit, so that we need the latest state of, you know, this of DIDS and SSI technology, including India and Aries and other associated techniques. Anyway, we have come to the end of today's meeting. And hopefully, we can come up with more data, I mean, more ways in which we can leapfrog from these regulations into implementing, you know, what are the recommendations, how do you look at the system implemented using DLTs and say that it's safe to do that, and how can we then also relate to what we have in hyper ledger? So with that, I think we come to the end of the meeting. Let me know any other thoughts that you might have before we close, or we can actually collaborate on the rocket chat or mailing list. Please put any of your thoughts about this and how we in the identity working group can collaborate and make things better. Pretty informative discussion today we had with Vinyan. All right, thank you. And good luck, Dan. And, you know, hopefully you're not freezing in doubles. Thanks, I've been very informative. I'll be on the next meeting. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. See you next time. Bye.