I guess you would hope that negotiators would have enough or be able to bring enough, I mean, this is obviously very dependent on what the kind of initiating circumstances are of any negotiation, but have enough flexibility to draw upon kind of various frameworks as they, as needed and as beneficial to a specific dispute, whether or not, you know, they call it IWRM or not, you know, the limitations of the IWRM, or not, you know, the limitations of the IWRM, whether it's in terms of scale or in terms of kind of what's not included because of its water-centric focus, like, can be supplemented by drawing off some of the other nexus, some of the next approaches as, you know, the others have said already that if you kind of in the process of negotiating a dispute, you ideally should be able to kind of pick and choose to an extent and not not be totally didactic about about how you apply these frameworks. I mean, I guess I don't know how you analyze it then if you're looking at it so ballistically, but it's hard for me to imagine any one framework being able to wholly encompass kind of all the possibilities of a water dispute. I think starting with a dispute is going to get you into a corner you don't need to be in. Start with the fact that you need to manage water. There's not a dispute. You just, you have water and you have competing demands and you have competing interests and you have to manage the water. Okay, what would be a good way to manage the water? To involve entities with broad authority or multiple authorities or narrow, just water