 One of the critical things about the evolution of technology, as you see it today, is the need to share because not everything is a competitive differentiator. There's a lot of pieces that would make us actually better together, be it in terms of infrastructure, common infrastructure for most people, but most importantly the whole element of cyber security. There is no reason for all of us to experience the same issue for us to learn. So one of the key things that we've done at the CTO Rante, but with the ITU, with nine operators and eight major vendors under the guise of the ITU is ratifying a lot of what we call the Ottawa Accord, to share threat exchange, to share best practices. As we notice there's a whole number of gaps in standards, it is important that we operationalize how we become better together, how together we are richer. This is to me cyber attacks or cyber terrorism is an air that is important to all of us. Not just like if it happens to my competitor or myself, this is the more the stronger we are together on that front. Well, the Ottawa Accord as we call it was government institutions coming together with standards bodies and a few operators about defining a framework to share. And that's one of the things that happened today at the meeting with the CTO round table of the approval. I don't know what happened, but more like ratification of the Accord to enable the global threat exchange, to enable the sharing of best practices globally, and all under the guise of the ITU because these days in a lot of places operators actually run a national infrastructure. And thus it's very important for the government to be comfortable with how good that national infrastructure is being run. So my aim is after today really excited to give it a shot to see the birth of the Ottawa Accord with the ITU, with the feedback that we got from the various stakeholders. I have to admit this is only my third CTO meeting and I think it's amazing how in 10-15 minutes we're able to deal up a very important topic, get enough to go around and see how we dovetail it into the standards. So when you look at certain people at certain levels, we really would like to do five or six or seven or eight topics in four hours. And that ideally is it because none of us really are subject matter experts, but all these areas are very important and critical. So these are the kind of meetings that I encourage the attendants and they actually spawn off a lot of activities and certain working groups in other industries.