From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A576142B76 for ; Mon, 22 May 2023 20:45:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F23C410E4; Mon, 22 May 2023 20:45:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-oi1-f175.google.com (mail-oi1-f175.google.com [209.85.167.175]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D23C040EE7 for ; Mon, 22 May 2023 20:45:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-oi1-f175.google.com with SMTP id 5614622812f47-39810ce3e13so847275b6e.2 for ; Mon, 22 May 2023 11:45:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; t=1684781132; x=1687373132; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=r4pKQzeFt5vGXuE+eAttEH+0DSLo1DwKKQG3yMXEbRI=; b=es0I2RD3Ws6DliO+C8m2bx6b5pH+Q+diM3I8an6VonnsEOBnUacGl1VNF1bpp5weRd 7zuzrdNQ9BTCRFn9le+XmdHHMv0X/red5T0SYLhrrYffmDKpQw2cLEkL3mpz3B6KfIgU mPTi0CpnXV1O3fpUyT/Tt5hhhdbGH7m7fFCbo= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1684781132; x=1687373132; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=r4pKQzeFt5vGXuE+eAttEH+0DSLo1DwKKQG3yMXEbRI=; b=Bjt5dQkkOkmvZOyUTtOW+KyLTDYRm4MO8DkuZ/y6ksfcqNFT7cjKD5+nLZskAxZMsE BevhrGT48dUt1QkqPC0NFU1ja9Bw4nibT4AWvNWaGzUP5k5aD5lFJ1C6lWzzhDSiex01 59oM7YyizHxo1ZMlHj7+2ssG0Pugm4nPGzeYPvaehOBwK8W/CpgoKinzShmlLTPoqDbK UZC49yD8vF1T+jc1NnymJfCapnYSHnKsQzZLmFXN5AZiH2pXzPQVYeiWRM5OE6Kft46V i6XIKHQvcRZCIE7td619/r4WMc92yWGvyTR9lWmApfTa7nWNGBDvJxL3U66SbqtRcDYL Xx9A== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDyaYA98wTs5VdZmBZC27KH/w13n5TZOiWXFCBzH0t7R9iCdDg5Y fbu5LqWGPhPMbjVpalG7o5ZlF19e8YG+zIWzJhfUmw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ4d8TURbw5BWsjngsW+CSbxepYltCSIn8F7fwldEC5lbISodjYmPJyRC75kNWVg7gt4mjNFiuZmF0ttm0YCLCI= X-Received: by 2002:aca:190f:0:b0:395:de70:a268 with SMTP id l15-20020aca190f000000b00395de70a268mr5437336oii.38.1684781132037; Mon, 22 May 2023 11:45:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <2835880.LqEvEWPEkG@thomas> In-Reply-To: From: Patrick Robb Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 14:45:21 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue To: Ali Alnubani Cc: Lincoln Lavoie , "NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL)" , Aaron Conole , "techboard@dpdk.org" , "ci@dpdk.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e657e605fc4cac95" X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ci-bounces@dpdk.org --000000000000e657e605fc4cac95 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Ali, We ran a DMARC report which showed errors on Friday, but none since then. Given that there have been patch series submitted over the weekend, this appears to be resolved now. On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 9:43=E2=80=AFAM Patrick Robb wr= ote: > We started limiting the subject line length over the weekend, so this > should be all resolved now. Ali please let us know if there are any issue= s. > > On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 5:07=E2=80=AFPM Patrick Robb = wrote: > >> You'd have to cap it by removing the commit message summary from the >>> subject I guess? >> >> I think I'll just take the existing subject line string and at the end >> cut all characters after 68. That way we can at least get 20 or so >> characters from the commit message summary in there, which will look kin= d >> of weird but some summary is better than nothing. >> >> On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 5:43=E2=80=AFAM Ali Alnubani = wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I see that it's keeping the subject header intact for up to 70 >>> characters: >>> >>> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230302085826.D4061601DC@dpdk-ubunt= u.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/raw >>> > Subject: |SUCCESS| pw124617 [PATCH] [v3] vhost: fix madvise arguments >>> alignment >>> >>> A subject of 71 char length is being folded: >>> >>> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230302101540.558F0601DC@dpdk-ubunt= u.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/raw >>> > Subject: |SUCCESS| pw124605 [PATCH] [v2] net/idpf: refine Rx/Tx queue >>> model >>> > info >>> >>> I didn't look into how exactly the folding algorithm for the python >>> email library works though. Maybe cap at 64-68 to be safe? >>> >>> You'd have to cap it by removing the commit message summary from the >>> subject I guess? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Ali >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* Lincoln Lavoie >>> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 1, 2023 10:35 PM >>> *To:* NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL) >>> *Cc:* Ali Alnubani ; Aaron Conole < >>> aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org ; >>> ci@dpdk.org >>> *Subject:* Re: UNH - DMARC issue >>> >>> Hi Ali, >>> >>> Yes, plain text is here to stay, it's been updated in all of our >>> tooling. >>> >>> We can also limit the subject lines. Do you know the "safe" length fro= m >>> mailman? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Lincoln >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 3:21=E2=80=AFPM Thomas Monjalon >>> wrote: >>> >>> Instead of patching, can we just make sure the subject is shorter? >>> Is there an impact in limiting the subject length? >>> >>> >>> 01/03/2023 20:52, Ali Alnubani: >>> > Hello, >>> > >>> > After further investigation, I see now that some reports have broken >>> DKIM signatures because Mailman (or the email libraries it uses) are >>> folding their long subject headers into multiple lines, probably to con= form >>> with internet standards. There isn=E2=80=99t a configuration to control= this per >>> list in Mailman though, so I might have to look into patching it. Will >>> update hopefully by end of next week. >>> > >>> > Can you keep the emails in plaintext format? They are more readable >>> now in https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/ as the body is no longer >>> being encoded. >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > Ali >>> > >>> > From: Ali Alnubani >>> > Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 3:10 PM >>> > To: Lincoln Lavoie >>> > Cc: Aaron Conole ; techboard@dpdk.org; ci@dpdk.or= g >>> > Subject: RE: UNH - DMARC issue >>> > >>> > Hi Lincoln, >>> > >>> > Thank you for taking the time to make the change. >>> > Unfortunately, however, I see that even some of the plaintext ones ar= e >>> still failing DMARC. This is an example if you want to check from your >>> client: >>> > >>> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230301075112.591AB601B1@dpdk-ubunt= u.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/ >>> > >>> > I=E2=80=99m checking if there is something I missed. >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > Ali >>> > >>> > From: Lincoln Lavoie >> >> >>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 10:57 PM >>> > To: Ali Alnubani > >>> > Cc: Aaron Conole >; >>> techboard@dpdk.org; ci@dpdk.org>> ci@dpdk.org> >>> > Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue >>> > >>> > Hi Ali, >>> > >>> > We deployed the change to only plaintext emails last week. Can you >>> confirm if this improves things from your side for the DMARC results. = I am >>> also also our IT admin to pull the reports for the past couple of days = to >>> see if failures are still being reported to us. >>> > >>> > Cheers, >>> > Lincoln >>> > >>> > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:20=E2=80=AFAM Ali Alnubani >> > wrote: >>> > > Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct? >>> > >>> > Correct, the copy I got failed DKIM and DMARC authentication. >>> > >>> > > Changing the content / format type will need a little more >>> investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails >>> being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation? = I >>> thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, et= c. >>> > >>> > Non plaintext emails are more likely to be mangled by Mailman, >>> breaking DKIM signature verification, and DMARC as a result. >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > Ali >>> > >>> > From: Lincoln Lavoie >> >> >>> > Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:37 PM >>> > To: Ali Alnubani > >>> > Cc: Aaron Conole >; >>> techboard@dpdk.org; Lincoln Lavoie < >>> lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>; ci@dpdk.org>> ci@dpdk.org> >>> > Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue >>> > >>> > HI Ali, >>> > >>> > The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on ou= r >>> internal list. I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make sure, y= our >>> example is one that failed, correct? >>> > >>> > Changing the content / format type will need a little more >>> investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails >>> being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation? = I >>> thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, et= c. >>> > >>> > Cheers, >>> > Lincoln >>> > >>> > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani >> > wrote: >>> > > -----Original Message----- >>> > > From: Aaron Conole > >>> > > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM >>> > > To: techboard@dpdk.org >>> > > Cc: Lincoln Lavoie >; >>> ci@dpdk.org >>> > > Subject: UNH - DMARC issue >>> > > >>> > > Hi all, >>> > > >>> > > UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement >>> "soon." >>> > > I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that= , >>> > > they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing som= e >>> > > header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing lis= t >>> to >>> > > the lab. >>> > > >>> > > I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email >>> here >>> > > to make sure you're aware. >>> > > >>> > > -Aaron >>> > >>> > Hello, and apologies for the delay, >>> > >>> > I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I >>> don't see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails. >>> > >>> > Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc >>> isn't being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example: >>> > >>> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubunt= u.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/ >>> > >>> > Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these >>> emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this? >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > Ali >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Lincoln Lavoie >>> > Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies >>> > 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824 >>> > lylavoie@iol.unh.edu >>> > https://www.iol.unh.edu >>> > +1-603-674-2755 (m) >>> > [ >>> https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQ= uw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI >>> ] >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Lincoln Lavoie >>> > Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies >>> > 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824 >>> > lylavoie@iol.unh.edu >>> > https://www.iol.unh.edu >>> > +1-603-674-2755 (m) >>> > [ >>> https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQ= uw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI >>> ] >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Lincoln Lavoie* >>> Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies >>> 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824 >>> lylavoie@iol.unh.edu >>> https://www.iol.unh.edu >>> +1-603-674-2755 (m) >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> Patrick Robb >> >> Technical Service Manager >> >> UNH InterOperability Laboratory >> >> 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824 >> >> www.iol.unh.edu >> >> >> > > -- > > Patrick Robb > > Technical Service Manager > > UNH InterOperability Laboratory > > 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824 > > www.iol.unh.edu > > > --=20 Patrick Robb Technical Service Manager UNH InterOperability Laboratory 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824 www.iol.unh.edu --000000000000e657e605fc4cac95 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Ali,

We ran a DMARC report which sho= wed errors on Friday, but none since then. Given that there have been patch= series submitted over the weekend, this appears to be resolved now.=C2=A0<= /div>

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 9:43=E2=80=AFAM Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
We started limiti= ng the subject line length over the weekend, so this should be all resolved= now. Ali please let us know if there are any issues.=C2=A0

On Thu, May 18, = 2023 at 5:07=E2=80=AFPM Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
You'd have to ca= p it by removing the commit message summary from the subject I guess?
I think I'll just take the existing subject line str= ing and at the end cut all characters after 68. That way we can at least ge= t 20 or so characters from the commit message summary in there, which will = look kind of weird but some summary is better than nothing.=C2=A0

On T= hu, Mar 2, 2023 at 5:43=E2=80=AFAM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com> wrote:
Hello,

I see that it's keeping the subject head= er intact for up to 70 characters:
> Subject: |SUCCESS| pw124617 [PATCH] [v3= ] vhost: fix madvise arguments alignment

A subject of 71 char length is being folded:=
>=C2=A0Subject: |SUCCESS| pw124605 [PATCH= ] [v2] net/idpf: refine Rx/Tx queue model
>=C2=A0 info

I didn't look into how exactly the foldi= ng algorithm for the python email library works though. Maybe cap at 64-68 = to be safe?

You'd have to cap it by removing the com= mit message summary from the subject I guess?

Thanks,
Ali

From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu> Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 10:35 PM
To: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL) <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>; Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org <techboard@dpdk.org&= gt;; ci@dpdk.org <<= a href=3D"mailto:ci@dpdk.org" target=3D"_blank">ci@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
=C2=A0
Hi Ali,

Yes, plain text is here to stay, it's be= en updated in all of our tooling.=C2=A0=C2=A0

We can also limit the subject lines.=C2=A0 D= o you know the "safe" length from mailman?

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 3:21=E2=80=AFPM Thomas Monjalon <= ;thomas@monjalon.n= et> wrote:
Instead of patching, can we just make sure the subject is shorter?
Is there an impact in limiting the subject length?


01/03/2023 20:52, Ali Alnubani:
> Hello,
>
> After further investigation, I see now that some reports have broken D= KIM signatures because Mailman (or the email libraries it uses) are folding= their long subject headers into multiple lines, probably to conform with i= nternet standards. There isn=E2=80=99t a configuration to control this per list in Mailman though, so I might have to look into p= atching it. Will update hopefully by end of next week.
>
> Can you keep the emails in plaintext format? They are more readable no= w in https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/ as the body is no longer being enco= ded.
>
> Regards,
> Ali
>
> From: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 3:10 PM
> To: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org<= /a>; ci@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: UNH - DMARC issue
>
> Hi Lincoln,
>
> Thank you for taking the time to make the change.
> Unfortunately, however, I see that even some of the plaintext ones are= still failing DMARC. This is an example if you want to check from your cli= ent:
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230301075112.591AB601B1@dpdk-ubuntu.dp= dklab.iol.unh.edu/
>
> I=E2=80=99m checking if there is something I missed.
>
> Regards,
> Ali
>
> From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 10:57 PM
> To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
> Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>; techboard@dpdk.org<= /a><mailto:techb= oard@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:= ci@dpdk.org>
> Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
>
> Hi Ali,
>
> We deployed the change to only plaintext emails last week.=C2=A0 Can y= ou confirm if this improves things from your side for the DMARC results.=C2= =A0 I am also also our IT admin to pull the reports for the past couple of = days to see if failures are still being reported to us.
>
> Cheers,
> Lincoln
>
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:20=E2=80=AFAM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto= :alialnu@nvidia.com= >> wrote:
> > Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?
>
> Correct, the copy I got failed DKIM and DMARC authentication.
>
> > Changing the content / format type will need a little more invest= igation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being= sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?=C2=A0 I t= hought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
>
> Non plaintext emails are more likely to be mangled by Mailman, breakin= g DKIM signature verification, and DMARC as a result.
>
> Regards,
> Ali
>
> From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:37 PM
> To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
> Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>; techboard@dpdk.org<= /a><mailto:techb= oard@dpdk.org>; Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>= ; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:= ci@dpdk.org>
> Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
>
> HI Ali,
>
> The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on our= internal list.=C2=A0 I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make s= ure, your example is one that failed, correct?
>
> Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigati= on, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent= . Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?=C2=A0 I though= t it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
>
> Cheers,
> Lincoln
>
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>= > wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
> > To: techb= oard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>
> > Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:= ci@dpdk.org>
> > Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement &= quot;soon."
> > I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part o= f that,
> > they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing s= ome
> > header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing l= ist to
> > the lab.
> >
> > I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the e= mail here
> > to make sure you're aware.
> >
> > -Aaron
>
> Hello, and apologies for the delay,
>
> I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I don= 't see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.
>
> Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc is= n't being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dp= dklab.iol.unh.edu/
>
> Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these e= mails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?
>
> Thanks,
> Ali
>
>
> --
> Lincoln Lavoie
> Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
> 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
> lylavoie@iol= .unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> https://www.iol.unh.edu
> +1-603-674-2755 (m)
> [https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIor= K4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI= ]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
>
>
> --
> Lincoln Lavoie
> Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
> 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
> lylavoie@iol= .unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> https://www.iol.unh.edu
> +1-603-674-2755 (m)
> [https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIor= K4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI= ]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
>







--
Lincoln Lavoie
Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
+1-603-674-2755 (m)


-- <= br>


--

Patrick Robb

Technical Service Manager

UNH InterOperability Labora= tory

21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824

www.iol.unh.edu

<= br>



--

Patrick Robb

<= span style=3D"font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-= color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">Technical S= ervice Manager

UNH InterOperability Laboratory

21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824

www.iol.unh.edu


--000000000000e657e605fc4cac95--