 Thanks, and that will move us on to our final question six, which David Eckstein will be framing for us, which is moving the UDN forward. And for this session, we have allotted a little bit of extra time for the discussion, because it starts focusing a little bit on summarizing what we've been discussing so far today. And with that, I will turn it over to David. Okay. So, I am David Eckstein. I am at the Office of Rare Diseases Research at NCATS, and I will help frame the discussion going forward, so basically framing the big picture. The UDN perspective will be provided by Rizwan Hamid from Vanderbilt University. The outside expert perspective will be from Bruce Korf from the University of Alabama at Birmingham, and the moderator, Summarizer will be Erin Schooner, who is one of our ESA members, and she's from the VA of Greater Los Angeles. So, how did we get where we are? So, it all started with undiagnosed patients, six to eight percent of the inquiries that our office used to get were from people who were still on their diagnostic odyssey, and the question was, what can NIH do to help? And the quick answer to that was the UDP, and so that was stood up in 2008, and you've heard all the descriptive stuff about what that became after a few years, when it was obvious that this was a sustainable type of program, that there was a need in the community. The question became, can this be replicated outside of the NIH? And the answer, or at least the way to maybe figure out the answer was the UDN. But this gave us the opportunity to ask sort of a bonus question, what sort of variations could we be asking in the UDN? What types of other options could be tested to see if they worked as well, or perhaps even work better than the way we were doing things already? So, just to remind you, the UDN objectives are to improve the level of diagnosis and care, facilitate the research into the etiology of the undiagnosed disease, and to create and integrate it in collaborative research community, identifying other options. I have a couple options that we've discussed previously here, sequencing prior versus after, whole ex-em versus whole genome, billing insurance, versus using research dollars. However, the Common Fund process brings us to what I call the big question, which is what should the future of the UDN be, and what does the future UDN look like? The answer, while we're hoping to get information from you to help us arrive at that answer, are we aware of some possibilities? Sure. We can continue as we've been going. The big question is what happens in six or seven years when the Common Fund money runs out, where does the money come from? If the program is just about the diagnosis, perhaps we continue to work on the manual of operations, make that publicly available, which it already is. We issue a white paper on best practices, and we walk away. Obviously, there's been a lot of sentiment today that it's more than just about the diagnosis. Perhaps it becomes an infrastructure program where, especially if the billing proves to be sufficient for maintaining a clinical site, maybe the program just works on developing the coordinating center and the cores, and the clinical sites are able to finance themselves. Perhaps some sort of public-private partnership. Obviously, there are a lot of stakeholders out there in industry, whether it's the pharma industry, insurance industry, or whatever, who could work with academia and NIH to form some sort of partnership. And perhaps there's another type of future that we haven't figured out yet. But it's critically important to figure some of this out now, because what the phase two version of the UDN looks like will be largely dependent on what we figure the future needs to be. We have to be able to answer certain questions in phase two to get to that future. Now to answer the big question, we have to ask a lot of smaller, but just as important questions. What are the end goals of the UDN? What can the UDN uniquely do that other organizations can't? Obviously, what is the vision and the mission of the UDN? What is the best strategy to optimize the outcomes, and how will the UDN be sustained once the common funding goes away? And finally, what are the advantages of being a network? And hopefully we will get some lively discussion about these. And I guess first talking about the UDN perspective is Rizwan.