 A gap between the nominal possibility of participating in Internet policy mechanisms and the reality of participating in an effective and meaningful way, due to the lack of resources, expertise, and institutional capacity.  A gap in the existence of comprehensive capacity building and information sharing mechanisms on Internet public policy issues. Other than the IGF and its regional and national initiatives, there are not many mechanisms which address Internet public policy issues in a comprehensive and holistic way, with the view of enhancing all stakeholders’ capabilities and knowledge on these issues at the global level. During the continuation of the work initiated by the Working group on Enhanced Cooperation and its correspondence group, a number of challenges were identified. For instance:  There were substantive disparities in the level of mechanisms identified in the WGEC/correspondence group. This feature remains. The current review of mechanisms goes into detail in some aspects (e.g. specific coverage of IETF’s Requests for Comments) while providing only a general mapping of other aspects.  There should be reflection on the most appropriate criteria to assess the status of mechanisms, for instance with regards to transparency and accountability and to participation of various stakeholders.  Difficulties were encountered in identifying the gaps in a way that is consistent and objective in the absence of clear set of criteria. 48