The differentiation has gone as far as action is concerned, as far as mitigation action is concerned, as far as review is concerned. So there is no differentiation now in the review. There is all part, India will also have an MRV on them. They will all party so that is universal, both the action and the review is universal. The only place where we have maintained differentiation is in finance. So in that sense we can still argue that the differentiation contains because the developed countries are required to give money to developing countries for their actions. So in that sense is a differentiation between the obligation of developed versus developing has been maintained on finance. But the worrying part of it is two or three things. One, the most worrying part of it is that they will be now a ratcheting up of ambition, but there has been no operationalization of equity by including the carbon budget. So by putting it, if you had said that the countries would have to increase their ambition based on the fair share of the carbon budget which is what Mr Modi had said when he came and it was there in the earlier draft, the fact that that has gone does create problems for the future. So you can argue that you have not lost everything that the battle will now move to the next ground because there are two places where we have gained which I do think is important. One, we have said that the agreement will be based on equity and CVDR and on the principles of the convention. So that is clear. It also says and that I am told is contentious still. It has one phrase that says that the actions of developing countries, developed countries will be targets whereas developing countries will have to take on actions efforts. Now there is a difference there. So they have one line that they have maintained but in every other way there is no differentiation maintained and there is now a time like. In 2018, they will be a special report by VCC to talk about what will be the actions required to keep the country and the world under 1.5. In 2018, they will be a facilitated dialogue. In 2020, we have to revise and resubmit our INDC in light of the new information. Now that is where the problem will be that when that new information comes, it will show very clearly there is a very small budget as I was explaining yesterday the budget of over 1000 eGaTans will probably be down to 550 eGaTans by that and there is no mention on how that budget will be shared. So that is really where the real pitfall for the future. Now you can argue that Indian government has managed to at least get in the back that the agreement will be based on equity. So you can argue that tomorrow to say as you said it will be based on equity, we expected to be an equitable reallocation of carbon space but it is not there at the current agreement. Two other things as far as loss and damages concern, the Americans have clearly won. So, the mobility and compensation is out which means that it is too close. The more worrying part of it as a trading mechanism has been set up now but what is worrying we on the trading mechanism is see when we had CDM in the past, we did not have any mitigation obligations. So, we could say that you invest in our part of the world, we will reduce emissions from that money and you take the credit in your INDC. Now, I also have an INDC, my commitment will also have to be enhanced in the future but I will also be selling you my cheap options. So, what I am doing now is not only saving, not only cutting emissions for myself, I am also cutting emissions for you. And that is worrying me tremendously because CDM without a legal commitment to reduce emissions because of the mechanism in which we could have always argued that it is cheaper in our part of the world to become emissions so they can take credit for it. But now we have commitments, we have legal commitments to reduce emissions. Those will have to be enhanced every five years and yet we are saying we will also trade with you and give you a cheapest options. So, that worries me. It is also a question of how countries will operationalize it. You can India can say I am not doing it but many other countries, smaller countries will because the last point is the money is still illusionary. 100 billion dollars was mentioned in the draft decision but it had been removed from the agreement. It was there in the agreement till the last draft, it has been removed in the agreement now. So, it is no longer in the agreement and we always know finance is very illusionary. So, I think red, red plus and CDM will be the way for countries to get money for this action and so what you are doing is to move the burden of transition on us. So, my overall is a mixed one. I will not bang it or crash the Indian one. I will simply say that we have managed to get something in. We have managed to get at least the issue of the fact that the agreement will be implemented on the principle of equity in but we have still not been able to operationalize equity and that is my worry.