[dhcwg] Re: [v6ops] Re: Re: Re: [IPv6]Re: An droid now supports DHCPv6 PD
Lorenzo Colitti <[email protected]> Wed, 17 Sep 2025 08:59:59 +0900
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.dhc,gmane.ietf.v6ops |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAKD1Yr2arrgqOT3D6s1w2grJ3M7KbXBNdfYX4xUu4QqFbp+Lww@mail.gmail.com> |
--===============3848412453983674557== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d0ec2d063ef3eb37" --000000000000d0ec2d063ef3eb37 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Did you enable PD via the P flag or with the heuristic? If you use the P flag but the A flag is still set, then the device will have IPv6 addresses from both autoconf and PD, and it will generally only use one of those. In this case they might be picking the SLAAC address. If you use the heuristic (i.e., send an RA with non-zero lifetime, but no PIO, or with a PIO with A=3D0), then the device should only have IPv6 addresses from PD. Do the devices also have IPv4? Generally Android devices should prefer IPv6 over IPv4. Are you observing that all traffic just uses IPv4? If nothing else, the connectivity probes (e.g., connectivitycheck.gstatic.com) should always use IPv6. If you're seeing the devices remain IPv4-only then we need to look into this further - get in touch off-thread and we can try to debug together. On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 10:09=E2=80=AFPM Daryll Swer <contact=3D [email protected]> wrote: > Lorenzo > > From the perspective of a network operator, how do I verify the Android > devices are actually making use of the PD they leased from the network? A= nd > how they sub-lease it, if they are doing that in some cases. > > For instance, in my personal home lab, I do /64 PD in addition to SLAAC, > and some Android devices from other users indeed pulls a /64 lease, which= I > can see on my router/DHCPv6 server. > > But no traffic ever flows in/out of the delegated PD, the devices appear > to pull the lease and then proceed to do nothing. These are non-AOSP > Android devices, so it probably varies by many of the various Android OEM > implementations. For example, Xiaomi devices floods my VLAN with Router > Advertisements! > > *--* > Best Regards > Daryll Swer > Website: daryllswer.com > <https://l.shortlink.es/l/d23649aed4c2ecb19e878bc80984f94257888400?u=3D21= 53471> > > > On Tue, 16 Sept 2025 at 18:08, Daryll Swer <[email protected]> wrote= : > >> I'm working on an IPv6 deployment right now where I accounted for RFC966= 3 >> or simply in other words: ia_pd on endpoints. >> >> I'm doing /38 per campus, /51 per VLAN, /60 per endpoint, 512 devices pe= r >> VLAN, 8192 VLANs/VNIs. >> >> The reason for /60s is an edge case involving users with compute nodes >> and their own hypervisors. If I exclude this factor, then /64 per endpoi= nt >> is sufficient in other more common scenarios. >> >> -- >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> >> On Tue, 16 Sep 2025 at 5:19=E2=80=AFPM, Mark Smith <[email protected]= om> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Tue, 16 Sept 2025 at 19:05, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo=3D >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Recommendations for network operators are written in RFC 9663. Some >>>> text about expected prefix lengths is in section 8 of that RFC. RFC 97= 62 >>>> says the prefix must be SLAAC-sized, which currently means it must be = a /64 >>>> per device. A /48 is fine for a small or medium network, but a campus = with >>>> tens of thousands of devices on it probably needs more than that. >>>> >>> >>> I would assume (and I'm interested to find out otherwise) that once a >>> network gets to say 30K hosts, then they've moved to BGP as their main >>> routing protocol. 65 536 /64 routes in BGP is a walk in the park, so a = /48 >>> for a network of say 50K hosts each with is own /64 and 15K /64s left o= ver >>> for everything else would seem to be a large network. In other words, I >>> think a /48 would suit all but the largest networks. >>> >>> Are there large enterprise or university networks with 10s of 1000s of >>> hosts that aren't using BGP (yet?). >>> >>> Regards, >>> Mark. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 5:59=E2=80=AFPM Tim Chown <Tim.Chown=3D >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Good news, thanks. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> What=E2=80=99s the recommended deployment model for PD to the host in= a campus >>>>> WiFi scenario? I can certainly see advantages for it, as you=E2=80= =99ve >>>>> highlighted in your email. The linked article explains =E2=80=9Cwhat= this means >>>>> for app developers=E2=80=9D but a =E2=80=9Cwhat this means for enterp= rise/campus network >>>>> operators=E2=80=9D would be useful. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Is it a given that in a middling or large campus the operator will >>>>> need to now receive more than a /48 from their NREN? Or was that alw= ays >>>>> too cautious? A small but growing number here are obtaining LIR stat= us >>>>> directly. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Tim >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 16/09/2025, 09:49, "Lorenzo Colitti" <lorenzo=3D >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> There was a typo in the original post. It was fixed earlier today; it >>>>> now says "Android 11 and above" >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 3:21=E2=80=AFPM Maciej =C5=BBenczykowski <maz= e=3D >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> There's a reddit thread: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/1nhzsst/android_developers_= blog_simplifying_advanced/ >>>>> <https://l.shortlink.es/l/94320df07ba30152b776a3bb291de9de682ecb31?u= =3D2153471> >>>>> >>>>> First comment: >>>>> >>>>> There's a mistake in the page: running Android and above before the >>>>> end of the year via a Google Play System Update. >>>>> >>>>> Which version? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 3:59=E2=80=AFAM Stan Barber <[email protected]> = wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> > Congrats! >>>>> > >>>>> > On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 6:32=E2=80=AFPM Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo=3D >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> FYI, we announced DHCPv6 PD support on Android today: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/09/simplifying-advance= d-networking-with.html >>>>> <https://l.shortlink.es/l/e1fede7071e6cf4b46d6593b2ad9cd6dd3156bfa?u= =3D2153471> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> This change should already be live on most Android devices running >>>>> Android 11 and above. Specifically: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> RFC 9762: if the P flag is set, the device will ask for a >>>>> SLAAC-sized prefix, and if it gets it, use it to form addresses. Some >>>>> devices will also disable SLAAC as per the SHOULD in the RFC. Not all >>>>> devices will support this because it requires a kernel change which w= ill be >>>>> rolling out over the coming months. In future releases, we expect tha= t the >>>>> prefix will be shared with downstream devices, wearable devices, VMs,= etc. >>>>> >> Heuristic: if the device obtains a default route but not PIO, it >>>>> will ask for a prefix, and if it gets it, use it to form addresses. T= his >>>>> allows DHCPv6-only networks to support Android devices today without = having >>>>> to upgrade their routers to set the P flag. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Over the next few months we also plan to roll out support for >>>>> DHCPv6 address registration (RFC 9686). >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I would like to thank everyone who contributed to RFC 9663, RFC >>>>> 9762 and RFC 9686. We think that DHCPv6 PD is *better* than either SL= AAC or >>>>> IA_NA, because it allows the device to provide end-to-end connectivit= y to >>>>> unlimited devices, containers, VMs etc. without scaling load on the >>>>> network. Plus the prefix can be tracked and managed by the operator, = which >>>>> means that it should be possible to deploy it in networks that requir= e >>>>> DHCPv6 or that have scaling issues dealing with many addresses. We ho= pe >>>>> that this will allow at least some enterprise operators to deploy IPv= 6 to >>>>> Android devices. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Cheers, >>>>> >> Lorenzo >>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >>>>> >> v6ops mailing list -- [email protected] >>>>> >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>>>> > >>>>> > -------------------------------------------------------------------= - >>>>> > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >>>>> > [email protected] >>>>> > List Info: https://mailman3.ietf.org/mailman3/lists/[email protected]/ >>>>> <https://l.shortlink.es/l/8c35987be16c96d285bacf1db33a24154967198a?u= =3D2153471> >>>>> > -------------------------------------------------------------------= - >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Maciej =C5=BBenczykowski, Kernel Networking Developer @ Google >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> >>> dhcwg mailing list -- [email protected] >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> v6ops mailing list -- [email protected] >>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>> >> [image: 9eb9e675cfd5983f2907e91254d424679cc4450a] > > --000000000000d0ec2d063ef3eb37 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">Did you enable PD via the P flag or with the heuristic? If= you use the P flag but the A flag is still set, then the device will have = IPv6 addresses from both autoconf and PD, and it will generally only use on= e of those. In this case they might be picking the SLAAC address. If you us= e the heuristic (i.e., send an RA with non-zero lifetime, but no PIO, or wi= th a PIO with A=3D0), then the device should only have IPv6 addresses from = PD.<div><br></div><div>Do the devices also have IPv4? Generally Android dev= ices should prefer IPv6 over IPv4. Are you observing that all traffic just = uses IPv4? If nothing else, the connectivity probes (e.g., <a href=3D"http:= //connectivitycheck.gstatic.com">connectivitycheck.gstatic.com</a>) should = always use IPv6. If you're seeing=C2=A0the devices remain IPv4-only the= n we need to look into this further - get in touch off-thread and we can tr= y to debug together.</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_c= ontainer"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 10:= 09=E2=80=AFPM Daryll Swer <contact=3D<a href=3D"mailto:40daryllswer.com@= dmarc.ietf.org">[email protected]</a>> wrote:<br></div><bl= ockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-lef= t:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D= "ltr"><div>Lorenzo</div><div><br></div><div>From the perspective of a netwo= rk operator, how do I verify the Android devices are actually making use of= the PD they leased from the network? And how they sub-lease it, if they ar= e doing that in some cases.</div><div><br></div><div>For instance, in my pe= rsonal home lab, I do /64 PD in addition to SLAAC, and some Android devices= from other users indeed pulls a /64 lease, which I can see on my router/DH= CPv6 server.</div><div><br></div><div>But no traffic ever flows in/out of t= he delegated PD, the devices appear to pull the lease and then proceed to d= o nothing. These are non-AOSP Android devices, so it probably varies by man= y of the various Android OEM implementations. For example, Xiaomi devices f= loods my VLAN with Router Advertisements!</div><div><div dir=3D"ltr" class= =3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr"><font color=3D"#000000" face=3D"arial= , sans-serif"><br><b>--</b><br></font><div><font color=3D"#000000" face=3D"= arial, sans-serif">Best Regards</font></div><div><font color=3D"#000000" fa= ce=3D"arial, sans-serif">Daryll Swer</font></div><div><font color=3D"#00000= 0" face=3D"arial, sans-serif">Website: <a href=3D"https://l.shortlink.es/l/= d23649aed4c2ecb19e878bc80984f94257888400?u=3D2153471" target=3D"_blank">dar= yllswer.com</a></font></div></div></div></div><br></div><br><img width=3D"0= " height=3D"0" alt=3D"" style=3D"display: flex;"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"= ><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, 16 Sept 2025 at 18:08, Daryl= l Swer <<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">cont= [email protected]</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote= " style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);= padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto">I'm working on an IPv6 deployment r= ight now where I accounted for RFC9663 or simply in other words: ia_pd on e= ndpoints.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">I'm doing = /38 per campus, /51 per VLAN, /60 per endpoint, 512 devices per VLAN, 8192 = VLANs/VNIs.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">The reason f= or /60s is an edge case involving users with compute nodes and their own hy= pervisors. If I exclude this factor, then /64 per endpoint is sufficient in= other more common scenarios.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"= auto">--<br></div><div dir=3D"auto"><div dir=3D"auto"><div dir=3D"ltr" clas= s=3D"gmail_signature">Sent from my iPhone</div></div></div><div><br></div><= div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On= Tue, 16 Sep 2025 at 5:19=E2=80=AFPM, Mark Smith <<a href=3D"mailto:mark= [email protected]" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>> wrote:= <br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8= ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr= "><div>Hi,</div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gm= ail_attr">On Tue, 16 Sept 2025 at 19:05, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo=3D<a h= ref=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">40google.com@d= marc.ietf.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" sty= le=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);paddi= ng-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">Recommendations for network operators are wri= tten in RFC 9663. Some text about expected prefix lengths is in section 8 o= f that RFC.=C2=A0RFC 9762 says the prefix must be SLAAC-sized, which curren= tly means it must be a /64 per device. A /48 is fine for a small or medium = network, but a campus with tens of thousands of devices on it probably need= s more than that.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I would assume (and= I'm interested to find out otherwise) that once a network gets to say = 30K hosts, then they've moved to BGP as their main routing protocol. 65= 536 /64 routes in BGP is a walk in the park, so a /48 for a network of say= 50K hosts each with is own /64 and 15K /64s left over for everything else = would seem to be a large network. In other words, I think a /48 would suit = all but the largest networks.</div><div><br></div><div>Are there large ente= rprise or university networks with 10s of 1000s of hosts that aren't us= ing BGP (yet?).</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Mark.</div><div= >=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px = 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"></blockquote= ></div></div><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class= =3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rg= b(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D= "ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 5:59=E2=80=AFPM Tim Chow= n <Tim.Chown=3D<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"= _blank">[email protected]</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote cla= ss=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid = rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div> <div lang=3D"EN-GB"> <div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt">Hi,<u></u><u></u></sp= an></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:rgb(33,33,33)"><u></u>=C2=A0<u>= </u></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:rgb(33,33,33)">Good news, thank= s.<u></u><u></u></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:rgb(33,33,33)"><u></u>=C2=A0<u>= </u></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:rgb(33,33,33)">What=E2=80=99s t= he recommended deployment model for PD to the host in a campus WiFi scenari= o?=C2=A0 =C2=A0I can certainly see advantages for it, as you=E2=80=99ve hig= hlighted in your email.=C2=A0 The linked article explains =E2=80=9Cwhat thi= s means for app developers=E2=80=9D but a =E2=80=9Cwhat this means for enterprise/= campus network operators=E2=80=9D would be useful.<u></u><u></u></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:rgb(33,33,33)"><u></u>=C2=A0<u>= </u></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:rgb(33,33,33)">Is it a given th= at in a middling or large campus the operator will need to now receive more= than a /48 from their NREN?=C2=A0 Or was that always too cautious?=C2=A0 A= small but growing number here are obtaining LIR status directly.<u></u><u></u></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:rgb(33,33,33)"><u></u>=C2=A0<u>= </u></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:rgb(33,33,33)">Tim </span><span= style=3D"font-size:11pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt"><u></u>=C2=A0<u></u><= /span></p> <div id=3D"m_-4514666410478473616m_-3964745720828426401m_-83322576574712678= 4m_-8902354524021554512m_7788389079499085868mail-editor-reference-message-c= ontainer"> <div> <div> <div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:36pt">On 16/09/2025, 09:49, &qu= ot;Lorenzo Colitti" <lorenzo=3D<a href=3D"mailto:40google.com@dmarc= .ietf.org" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>> wrote:<u><= /u><u></u></p> </div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:36pt"><u></u>=C2=A0<u></u></p> <div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:36pt">There was a typo in the o= riginal post. It was fixed earlier today; it now says "Android 11 and = above"<u></u><u></u></p> </div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:36pt"><u></u>=C2=A0<u></u></p> <div> <div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:36pt">On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 3= :21<span style=3D"font-family:Arial,sans-serif">=E2=80=AF</span>PM Maciej = =C5=BBenczykowski <maze=3D<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]"= target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u>= </p> </div> <blockquote style=3D"border-width:medium medium medium 1pt;border-style:non= e none none solid;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0c= m;border-color:currentcolor currentcolor currentcolor rgb(204,204,204)"> <p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:36pt">There's a reddit thre= ad:<br> <br> <a href=3D"https://l.shortlink.es/l/94320df07ba30152b776a3bb291de9de682ecb3= 1?u=3D2153471" target=3D"_blank">https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/= 1nhzsst/android_developers_blog_simplifying_advanced/</a><br> <br> First comment:<br> <br> There's a mistake in the page: running Android and above before the<br> end of the year via a Google Play System Update.<br> <br> Which version?<br> <br> <br> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 3:59<span style=3D"font-family:Arial,sans-serif">= =E2=80=AF</span>AM Stan Barber <<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target= =3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>> wrote:<br> ><br> > Congrats!<br> ><br> > On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 6:32<span style=3D"font-family:Arial,sans-seri= f">=E2=80=AF</span>PM Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo=3D<a href=3D"mailto:40goo= [email protected]" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>&g= t; wrote:<br> >><br> >> FYI, we announced DHCPv6 PD support on Android today:<br> >><br> >> <a href=3D"https://l.shortlink.es/l/e1fede7071e6cf4b46d6593b2ad9cd= 6dd3156bfa?u=3D2153471" target=3D"_blank"> https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/09/simplifying-advanced-netw= orking-with.html</a><br> >><br> >> This change should already be live on most Android devices running= Android 11 and above. Specifically:<br> >><br> >> RFC 9762: if the P flag is set, the device will ask for a SLAAC-si= zed prefix, and if it gets it, use it to form addresses. Some devices will = also disable SLAAC as per the SHOULD in the RFC. Not all devices will suppo= rt this because it requires a kernel change which will be rolling out over the coming months. In future releases, we e= xpect that the prefix will be shared with downstream devices, wearable devi= ces, VMs, etc.<br> >> Heuristic: if the device obtains a default route but not PIO, it w= ill ask for a prefix, and if it gets it, use it to form addresses. This all= ows DHCPv6-only networks to support Android devices today without having to= upgrade their routers to set the P flag.<br> >><br> >> Over the next few months we also plan to roll out support for DHCP= v6 address registration (RFC 9686).<br> >><br> >> I would like to thank everyone who contributed to RFC 9663, RFC 97= 62 and RFC 9686. We think that DHCPv6 PD is *better* than either SLAAC or I= A_NA, because it allows the device to provide end-to-end connectivity to un= limited devices, containers, VMs etc. without scaling load on the network. Plus the prefix can be tracked and ma= naged by the operator, which means that it should be possible to deploy it = in networks that require DHCPv6 or that have scaling issues dealing with ma= ny addresses. We hope that this will allow at least some enterprise operators to deploy IPv6 to Android de= vices.<br> >><br> >> Cheers,<br> >> Lorenzo<br> >> _______________________________________________<br> >> v6ops mailing list -- <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"= _blank">[email protected]</a><br> >> To unsubscribe send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:v6ops-leave@ietf= .org" target=3D"_blank"> [email protected]</a><br> ><br> > --------------------------------------------------------------------<b= r> > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list<br> > <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a><b= r> > List Info: <a href=3D"https://l.shortlink.es/l/8c35987be16c96d285bacf1= db33a24154967198a?u=3D2153471" target=3D"_blank"> https://mailman3.ietf.org/mailman3/lists/[email protected]/</a><br> > --------------------------------------------------------------------<b= r> <br> --<br> Maciej =C5=BBenczykowski, Kernel Networking Developer @ Google<u></u><u></u= ></p> </blockquote> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div></blockquote></div> _______________________________________________<br></blockquote></div></div= ><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quo= te" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204= );padding-left:1ex"> dhcwg mailing list -- <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">d= [email protected]</a><br> To unsubscribe send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" tar= get=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a><br> </blockquote></div></div> _______________________________________________<br> v6ops mailing list -- <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">v= [email protected]</a><br> To unsubscribe send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" tar= get=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a><br> </blockquote></div></div><span><span style=3D"display:none"><img alt=3D"9eb= 9e675cfd5983f2907e91254d424679cc4450a" width=3D"0" height=3D"0"></span></sp= an> </blockquote></div></div> </blockquote></div> --000000000000d0ec2d063ef3eb37-- --===============3848412453983674557== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KZGhjd2cgbWFp bGluZyBsaXN0IC0tIGRoY3dnQGlldGYub3JnClRvIHVuc3Vic2NyaWJlIHNlbmQgYW4gZW1haWwg dG8gZGhjd2ctbGVhdmVAaWV0Zi5vcmcK --===============3848412453983674557==--