From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi1-x229.google.com (mail-oi1-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 320973CB37 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2024 11:42:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-oi1-x229.google.com with SMTP id 5614622812f47-3de13d6bdcaso1946245b6e.2 for ; Tue, 03 Sep 2024 08:42:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google; t=1725378167; x=1725982967; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=IEg3BdUId9XO9Cczy6PRjq1X0i3E4ZX7cPLTBBsNrHY=; b=NjVM1mf32DL46OJ6t7wXccA/U5ll9n4haLi4O1YmZlXMvQAx47eY2vyF2S3Z+TIEQz kDZPcZtMc5TmAmPS9IJfXuzuEBxPSAfvofj2o6uSrhUms4UkF+m6PYxmndx15bM419Pf 3OxYoJqRwCZQvZLP/USxWNZEOLLcVVYCHe7Qs= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1725378167; x=1725982967; 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=IEg3BdUId9XO9Cczy6PRjq1X0i3E4ZX7cPLTBBsNrHY=; b=WD3w+ebKhw0WSKSw5WFv84CRrqV6j61H3itDxm4eNDw5Le57+BY7gwoWf7MWiYu5Oi iTRNOHGetwxVfsOdI6xqPWtlzva5gX+dP5GPsH2tZ6XAOG9nj5Xz7g6QQFvoND1vNavq RrlcDsSv7mBLY4iwCQrYODVHmMWU5AxMocYTsccvMHZwCcyFGFFkhLdLGTl5WEA26Ndl UoOMSffN02wJwb6FhRbjZCm2l9nHiz+CSZ1NJxbzLfW8vJMwbnZCVnnUDl7XTGjsRzI+ l4TDkJEcqx8M7L+gxgER8TXZ7V9aYTUYZ73m+0wmEwFIHEpyv0//ibrusKJz5GarJ7ES Ctlw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWUYg15KDfIqPP2MRUvBokO7gRDUenKzRVSy9oYPrJcSreFcyJgjyTnPVMQ+7veAFiakdjhA0GrwQ==@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz4dStBOiR73urMkLrqxX7EKJ5htkhV4YjHVS9h57fdpOApQvq4 UKtg51inkQre2V6aU26vv2NAjzppRR94r37KgWi3nL6oXo2rAHhKqWsB+l93Rk3bokCvsMg0JkP ErOKdPCfEf0fkzZqVgenqLC/NxMUER6wcag+TD3d24eROtUgIR9R6DPFSVasEsJXtlm6pn9LG9A +F00MHfkQ4uky8FX9Wj61CUJw96Fn7 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE7rWjASTWq62unv1m0UFqZP0xt9ExxbP366ftyVgpdcKDAUJ9k7ao9UBKl818eABgawwONInv2BpRu6v/PoRo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:6488:b0:3d9:dcbc:6b7a with SMTP id 5614622812f47-3e00cb83abbmr2450150b6e.13.1725378167208; Tue, 03 Sep 2024 08:42:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20240902042024.8A7E3620054@107-137-68-211.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> <13so850r-s23q-r0sp-0nqp-ss9q2q522542@ynat.uz> In-Reply-To: From: Bob McMahon Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 08:42:34 -0700 Message-ID: To: David Lang Cc: Hal Murray , Starlink , Make-Wifi-fast , bloat Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="000000000000ca80e5062138e81d" Subject: Re: [Starlink] [Make-wifi-fast] bloat on wifi8 and 802.11 wg X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2024 15:42:48 -0000 --000000000000ca80e5062138e81d Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c2b33e062138e8bb" --000000000000c2b33e062138e8bb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Wi-Fi Alliance does certifications. I think that's the group that would need to take on new certification & test scenarios. The 802.11 standards folks don't do testing, nor do they even make sure the current state of engineering can realize the standard which is in the form of a document. And to your point, per the MCS index table, a PHY rate selection engineer has microseconds to find the one entry that is the local optimum for the transmit at hand.. https://mcsindex.com/ The standards group created the table of options with little to no regard of the PHY rate selection engineer's task. It's kinda like a composer who writes symphonies that no orchestra can play. Bob On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 8:20=E2=80=AFPM David Lang wrote: > Bob McMahon wrote: > > > This is David's experience. It doesn't extrapolate to the industry. > > If I didn't make it clear, I have no inside information on the industry, = I > am > operating from the point of view of a consumer useing the products and > looking > at how they are advertised and how they work in practice. > > My frustration is less with the product manufacturers than it is with the > standards people. I don't expect a product manufacturer to test beyond > 'does it > meet the standard' (with some interoperability to see if everyone is > interpreting the standard the same way) > > But the people drafting the standards (which may include some of the > manufacturers), do need to be doing the more expensive and extensive > testing for > real-world conditions, not just the easier to test lab conditions. And > that's > where I don't see much progress over the years. > > If you live on a house with a 1 acre lot or larger, the current standards > will > work well for you. In a school or apartment building, there seems to be a > lack > of progress at the standards level (and therefor at the product level) > from the > time that the OLPC first attempted to do serious work in high density > environments. > > David Lang > > > Our > > testing as a component supplier is quite extensive. The level of math > > required likely equals ML. The table stakes for a 2 BSS system with > hidden > > nodes, etc is $80K. That's just equipment. Then test engineers with dee= p > > expertise of 802.11 have to be hired. And they have to continuously lea= rn > > as 802.11 is a living standard. And now they need to learn CCAs and > network > > marking planes. Then this all has to be paid for typically through > > component sells as there are no software SKUs. > > > > The cadences for new ASICs is 24 months. The cadences for OSP upgrades = is > > 10 to 20 years. > > > > Of course testing is under funded. No stock b.s. to pay the bills. It h= as > > to come from discounted cash flows. > > > > Everyone wants the experts to work for free. Iperf2 is that already. I > > don't see any more freebies on the horizon. > > > > Bob > > > > On Sun, Sep 1, 2024, 10:05 PM David Lang via Make-wifi-fast < > > make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > > > >> On Sun, 1 Sep 2024, Hal Murray via Make-wifi-fast wrote: > >> > >>> David Lang said: > >>>> It really doesn't help that everyone in the industry is pushing for > >>>> higher bandwidth for a single host. That's a nice benchmark number, > but > >>>> not really relevant int he real world. > >>> > >>>> Even mu-mimo is of limited use as most routers only handle a handful > of > >>>> clients. > >>> > >>>> But the biggest problem is just the push to use wider channels and > gain > >>>> efficiency in long-running bulk transfers by bundling lots of IP > packets > >>>> into a single transmission. This works well when you don't have > >>>> congestion and have a small number of clients. But when you have lo= ts > >> of > >>>> clients, spanning many generations of wifi technology, you need to = go > >> to > >>>> narrower channels, but more separate routers to maximize the fairne= ss > >> of > >>>> available airtime. > >>> > >>> What does that say about the minimal collection of gear required in a > >> test > >>> lab? > >>> > >>> If you had a lab with plenty of gear, what tests would you run? > >> > >> I'll start off by saying that my experience is from practical > in-the-field > >> uses, > >> deploying wifi to support thousands of users in a conference setting. > It's > >> possible that some people are doing the tests I describe below in thei= r > >> labs, > >> but from the way routers and wifi standards are advertised and the > guides > >> to > >> deploy them are written, it doesn't seem like they are. > >> > >> My belief is that most of the tests are done in relatively clean RF > >> environments > >> where only the devices on the test network exist, and they can always > hear > >> everyone on the network. In such environments, everything about existi= ng > >> wifi > >> standards and the push for higher bandwidth channels makes a lot of > sense > >> (there > >> are still some latency problems) > >> > >> But the world outside the lab is far more complex > >> > >> you need to simulate a dispursed, congested RF environment. This > includes > >> hidden > >> transmitters (stations A-B-C where B can hear A and C but A and C cann= ot > >> hear > >> each other), dealing with weak signals (already covered), interactions > of > >> independent networks on the same channels (a-b and c-d that cannot tal= k > to > >> each > >> other), legacy equipment on the network (as slow as 802.11g at least, = if > >> not > >> 802.11b to simulate old IoT devices), and a mix of bulk-transfers > >> (download/uploads), buffered streaming (constant traffic, but buffered > so > >> not > >> super-sentitive to latency), unbuffered streaming (low bandwidth, but > >> sensitive > >> to latency), and short, latency sensitive traffic (things that block > other > >> traffic until they are answered, like DNS, http cache checks, http mai= n > >> pages > >> that they pull lots of other URLs, etc) > >> > >> test large number of people in a given area (start with an all wireles= s > >> office, > >> then move on to classroom density), test not just one room, but multip= le > >> rooms > >> that partially hear each other (the amount of attenuation or reflectio= n > >> between > >> the rooms needs to vary). The ultimate density test would be a > >> stadium-type > >> setting where you have rows of chairs, but not tables and everyone is > >> trying to > >> livestream (or view a livestream) at once. > >> > >> Test not just the ultra-wide bandwidth with a single AP in the rooms, > but > >> narrower channels with multiple APs distributed around the rooms. Test > APs > >> positioned high, and set to high power to have large coverage areas > >> against APs > >> positioned low (signals get absorbed by people, so channels can be > reused > >> at > >> shorter distances) and set to low power (microcell approach). Test APs > >> overhead > >> with directional antennas so they cover a small footprint. > >> > >> Test with different types of walls around/between the rooms, metal stu= ds > >> and > >> sheetrock of a modern office have very little affect on signals, > >> stone/brick > >> walls of old buildings (and concrete walls in some areas of new > buildings) > >> absorb the signal, the metal grid in movable air walls blocks and > reflects > >> signals > >> > >> Remember that these are operating in 'unlicensed' spectrum, and so you > can > >> have > >> other devices operating here as well causing periodic interference > (which > >> could > >> show up as short segments of corruption or just an increased noise > floor). > >> Current wifi standards interpret any failed signals as a weak signal, = so > >> they > >> drop down to a slower modulation or increasing power in the hope of > >> getting the > >> signal through. If the problem is actually interference from other > devices > >> (especially other APs that it can't decipher), the result is that all > >> stations > >> end up yelling slowly to try and get through and the result is very hi= gh > >> levels > >> of noise and no messages getting through. Somehow, the systems should > >> detect > >> that the noise floor is high and/or that there is other stuff happenin= g > on > >> the > >> network that they can hear, but not necessarily decipher and switch aw= ay > >> from > >> the 'weak signal' mode of operation (which is appropriate in sparse > >> environments), and instead work to talk faster and at lower power to t= ry > >> and > >> reduce the overall interference while still getting their signal > through. > >> (it does no good for one station to be transmitting at 3w while the > >> station it's > >> talking to is transmitting at 50mw). As far as I know, there is > currently > >> no way > >> for stations to signal what power they are using (and the effective > power > >> would > >> be modified by the antenna system, both transmitted and received), so > this > >> may > >> be that something like 'I'm transmitting at 50% of my max and I hear y= ou > >> at 30% > >> with noise at 10%' <-> 'I'm transmitting at 100% of my max and I hear > you > >> at 80% > >> woth noise at 30%' could cause the first station to cut down on it's > power > >> until > >> the two are hearing each other at similar levels (pure speculation her= e, > >> suggestion for research ideas) > >> > >>> How many different tests would it take to give reasonable coverage? > >> > >> That's hard for me to say, and not every device needs to go through > every > >> test. > >> But when working on a new standard, it needs to go through a lot of > these > >> tests, > >> the most important ones IMHO are how they work with a high density of > >> users > >> accessing multiple routers which are distributed so there is overlappi= ng > >> coverage and include a mix of network traffic. > >> > >> David Lang > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Make-wifi-fast mailing list > >> Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net > >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast > > > > > --=20 This electronic communication and the information and any files transmitted= =20 with it, or attached to it, are confidential and are intended solely for=20 the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain= =20 information that is confidential, legally privileged, protected by privacy= =20 laws, or otherwise restricted from disclosure to anyone else. If you are=20 not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the=20 e-mail to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use,=20 copying, distributing, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of= =20 this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error,= =20 please return the e-mail to the sender, delete it from your computer, and= =20 destroy any printed copy of it. --000000000000c2b33e062138e8bb Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Wi-Fi Alliance does certifications. I think that's the= group that would need to take on new certification & test scenarios.
The 802.11 standards folks don't do testing, nor do they even mak= e sure the=C2=A0current state of engineering can realize the=C2=A0standard = which is in the form of a document. And to your point, per the MCS index=C2= =A0table, a PHY rate selection engineer=C2=A0has microseconds to find the o= ne entry that is the local optimum for the transmit at hand..=C2=A0https://mcsindex.com/=C2= =A0 The standards group created the table of options with little to no rega= rd of the PHY rate selection engineer's=C2=A0task. It's kinda like = a composer who writes symphonies that no orchestra can play.=C2=A0

B= ob

On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 8:20=E2=80=AFPM David Lang <david@lang.hm> wrote:
Bob McMahon wrote:

> This is David's experience. It doesn't extrapolate to the indu= stry.

If I didn't make it clear, I have no inside information on the industry= , I am
operating from the point of view of a consumer useing the products and look= ing
at how they are advertised and how they work in practice.

My frustration is less with the product manufacturers than it is with the <= br> standards people. I don't expect a product manufacturer to test beyond = 'does it
meet the standard' (with some interoperability to see if everyone is interpreting the standard the same way)

But the people drafting the standards (which may include some of the
manufacturers), do need to be doing the more expensive and extensive testin= g for
real-world conditions, not just the easier to test lab conditions. And that= 's
where I don't see much progress over the years.

If you live on a house with a 1 acre lot or larger, the current standards w= ill
work well for you. In a school or apartment building, there seems to be a l= ack
of progress at the standards level (and therefor at the product level) from= the
time that the OLPC first attempted to do serious work in high density
environments.

David Lang

> Our
> testing as a component supplier is quite extensive. The level of math<= br> > required likely equals ML. The table stakes for a 2 BSS system with hi= dden
> nodes, etc is $80K. That's just equipment. Then test engineers wit= h deep
> expertise of 802.11 have to be hired. And they have to continuously le= arn
> as 802.11 is a living standard. And now they need to learn CCAs and ne= twork
> marking planes. Then this all has to be paid for typically through
> component sells as there are no software SKUs.
>
> The cadences for new ASICs is 24 months. The cadences for OSP upgrades= is
> 10 to 20 years.
>
> Of course testing is under funded. No stock b.s. to pay the bills. It = has
> to come from discounted cash flows.
>
> Everyone wants the experts to work for free. Iperf2 is that already. I=
> don't see any more freebies on the horizon.
>
> Bob
>
> On Sun, Sep 1, 2024, 10:05 PM David Lang via Make-wifi-fast <
> make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 1 Sep 2024, Hal Murray via Make-wifi-fast wrote:
>>
>>> David Lang said:
>>>> It really doesn't help that everyone in the industry i= s pushing for
>>>> higher=C2=A0 bandwidth for a single host. That's a nic= e benchmark number, but
>>>> not really=C2=A0 relevant int he real world.
>>>
>>>> Even mu-mimo is of limited use as most routers only handle= a handful of
>>>> clients.
>>>
>>>> But the biggest problem is just the push to use wider chan= nels and gain
>>>> efficiency in long-running bulk transfers by bundling lots= of IP packets
>>>> into a=C2=A0 single transmission. This works well when you= don't have
>>>> congestion and have a=C2=A0 small number of clients. But w= hen you have lots
>> of
>>>> clients, spanning many=C2=A0 generations of wifi technolog= y, you need to go
>> to
>>>> narrower channels, but more=C2=A0 separate routers to maxi= mize the fairness
>> of
>>>> available airtime.
>>>
>>> What does that say about the minimal collection of gear requir= ed in a
>> test
>>> lab?
>>>
>>> If you had a lab with plenty of gear, what tests would you run= ?
>>
>> I'll start off by saying that my experience is from practical = in-the-field
>> uses,
>> deploying wifi to support thousands of users in a conference setti= ng. It's
>> possible that some people are doing the tests I describe below in = their
>> labs,
>> but from the way routers and wifi standards are advertised and the= guides
>> to
>> deploy them are written, it doesn't seem like they are.
>>
>> My belief is that most of the tests are done in relatively clean R= F
>> environments
>> where only the devices on the test network exist, and they can alw= ays hear
>> everyone on the network. In such environments, everything about ex= isting
>> wifi
>> standards and the push for higher bandwidth channels makes a lot o= f sense
>> (there
>> are still some latency problems)
>>
>> But the world outside the lab is far more complex
>>
>> you need to simulate a dispursed, congested RF environment. This i= ncludes
>> hidden
>> transmitters (stations A-B-C where B can hear A and C but A and C = cannot
>> hear
>> each other), dealing with weak signals (already covered), interact= ions of
>> independent networks on the same channels (a-b and c-d that cannot= talk to
>> each
>> other), legacy equipment on the network (as slow as 802.11g at lea= st, if
>> not
>> 802.11b to simulate old IoT devices), and a mix of bulk-transfers<= br> >> (download/uploads), buffered streaming (constant traffic, but buff= ered so
>> not
>> super-sentitive to latency), unbuffered streaming (low bandwidth, = but
>> sensitive
>> to latency), and short, latency sensitive traffic (things that blo= ck other
>> traffic until they are answered, like DNS, http cache checks, http= main
>> pages
>> that they pull lots of other URLs, etc)
>>
>> test large number of people in a given area (start with an all wir= eless
>> office,
>> then move on to classroom density), test not just one room, but mu= ltiple
>> rooms
>> that partially hear each other (the amount of attenuation or refle= ction
>> between
>> the rooms needs to vary). The ultimate density test would be a
>> stadium-type
>> setting where you have rows of chairs, but not tables and everyone= is
>> trying to
>> livestream (or view a livestream) at once.
>>
>> Test not just the ultra-wide bandwidth with a single AP in the roo= ms, but
>> narrower channels with multiple APs distributed around the rooms. = Test APs
>> positioned high, and set to high power to have large coverage area= s
>> against APs
>> positioned low (signals get absorbed by people, so channels can be= reused
>> at
>> shorter distances) and set to low power (microcell approach). Test= APs
>> overhead
>> with directional antennas so they cover a small footprint.
>>
>> Test with different types of walls around/between the rooms, metal= studs
>> and
>> sheetrock of a modern office have very little affect on signals, >> stone/brick
>> walls of old buildings (and concrete walls in some areas of new bu= ildings)
>> absorb the signal, the metal grid in movable air walls blocks and = reflects
>> signals
>>
>> Remember that these are operating in 'unlicensed' spectrum= , and so you can
>> have
>> other devices operating here as well causing periodic interference= (which
>> could
>> show up as short segments of corruption or just an increased noise= floor).
>> Current wifi standards interpret any failed signals as a weak sign= al, so
>> they
>> drop down to a slower modulation or increasing power in the hope o= f
>> getting the
>> signal through. If the problem is actually interference from other= devices
>> (especially other APs that it can't decipher), the result is t= hat all
>> stations
>> end up yelling slowly to try and get through and the result is ver= y high
>> levels
>> of noise and no messages getting through. Somehow, the systems sho= uld
>> detect
>> that the noise floor is high and/or that there is other stuff happ= ening on
>> the
>> network that they can hear, but not necessarily decipher and switc= h away
>> from
>> the 'weak signal' mode of operation (which is appropriate = in sparse
>> environments), and instead work to talk faster and at lower power = to try
>> and
>> reduce the overall interference while still getting their signal t= hrough.
>> (it does no good for one station to be transmitting at 3w while th= e
>> station it's
>> talking to is transmitting at 50mw). As far as I know, there is cu= rrently
>> no way
>> for stations to signal what power they are using (and the effectiv= e power
>> would
>> be modified by the antenna system, both transmitted and received),= so this
>> may
>> be that something like 'I'm transmitting at 50% of my max = and I hear you
>> at 30%
>> with noise at 10%' <-> 'I'm transmitting at 100%= of my max and I hear you
>> at 80%
>> woth noise at 30%' could cause the first station to cut down o= n it's power
>> until
>> the two are hearing each other at similar levels (pure speculation= here,
>> suggestion for research ideas)
>>
>>> How many different tests would it take to give reasonable cove= rage?
>>
>> That's hard for me to say, and not every device needs to go th= rough every
>> test.
>> But when working on a new standard, it needs to go through a lot o= f these
>> tests,
>> the most important ones IMHO are how they work with a high density= of
>> users
>> accessing multiple routers which are distributed so there is overl= apping
>> coverage and include a mix of network traffic.
>>
>> David Lang
>> _______________________________________________
>> Make-wifi-fast mailing list
>> Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo= /make-wifi-fast
>
>

This ele= ctronic communication and the information and any files transmitted with it= , or attached to it, are confidential and are intended solely for the use o= f the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain informat= ion that is confidential, legally privileged, protected by privacy laws, or= otherwise restricted from disclosure to anyone else. If you are not the in= tended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the= intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, copying, distrib= uting, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is st= rictly prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error, please return the = e-mail to the sender, delete it from your computer, and destroy any printed= copy of it. --000000000000c2b33e062138e8bb-- --000000000000ca80e5062138e81d Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIIQagYJKoZIhvcNAQcCoIIQWzCCEFcCAQExDzANBglghkgBZQMEAgEFADALBgkqhkiG9w0BBwGg gg3BMIIFDTCCA/WgAwIBAgIQeEqpED+lv77edQixNJMdADANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQsFADBMMSAwHgYD VQQLExdHbG9iYWxTaWduIFJvb3QgQ0EgLSBSMzETMBEGA1UEChMKR2xvYmFsU2lnbjETMBEGA1UE AxMKR2xvYmFsU2lnbjAeFw0yMDA5MTYwMDAwMDBaFw0yODA5MTYwMDAwMDBaMFsxCzAJBgNVBAYT AkJFMRkwFwYDVQQKExBHbG9iYWxTaWduIG52LXNhMTEwLwYDVQQDEyhHbG9iYWxTaWduIEdDQyBS MyBQZXJzb25hbFNpZ24gMiBDQSAyMDIwMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA vbCmXCcsbZ/a0fRIQMBxp4gJnnyeneFYpEtNydrZZ+GeKSMdHiDgXD1UnRSIudKo+moQ6YlCOu4t rVWO/EiXfYnK7zeop26ry1RpKtogB7/O115zultAz64ydQYLe+a1e/czkALg3sgTcOOcFZTXk38e aqsXsipoX1vsNurqPtnC27TWsA7pk4uKXscFjkeUE8JZu9BDKaswZygxBOPBQBwrA5+20Wxlk6k1 e6EKaaNaNZUy30q3ArEf30ZDpXyfCtiXnupjSK8WU2cK4qsEtj09JS4+mhi0CTCrCnXAzum3tgcH cHRg0prcSzzEUDQWoFxyuqwiwhHu3sPQNmFOMwIDAQABo4IB2jCCAdYwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgGG MGAGA1UdJQRZMFcGCCsGAQUFBwMCBggrBgEFBQcDBAYKKwYBBAGCNxQCAgYKKwYBBAGCNwoDBAYJ KwYBBAGCNxUGBgorBgEEAYI3CgMMBggrBgEFBQcDBwYIKwYBBQUHAxEwEgYDVR0TAQH/BAgwBgEB /wIBADAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUljPR5lgXWzR1ioFWZNW+SN6hj88wHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUj/BLf6guRSSu TVD6Y5qL3uLdG7wwegYIKwYBBQUHAQEEbjBsMC0GCCsGAQUFBzABhiFodHRwOi8vb2NzcC5nbG9i YWxzaWduLmNvbS9yb290cjMwOwYIKwYBBQUHMAKGL2h0dHA6Ly9zZWN1cmUuZ2xvYmFsc2lnbi5j b20vY2FjZXJ0L3Jvb3QtcjMuY3J0MDYGA1UdHwQvMC0wK6ApoCeGJWh0dHA6Ly9jcmwuZ2xvYmFs c2lnbi5jb20vcm9vdC1yMy5jcmwwWgYDVR0gBFMwUTALBgkrBgEEAaAyASgwQgYKKwYBBAGgMgEo CjA0MDIGCCsGAQUFBwIBFiZodHRwczovL3d3dy5nbG9iYWxzaWduLmNvbS9yZXBvc2l0b3J5LzAN BgkqhkiG9w0BAQsFAAOCAQEAdAXk/XCnDeAOd9nNEUvWPxblOQ/5o/q6OIeTYvoEvUUi2qHUOtbf jBGdTptFsXXe4RgjVF9b6DuizgYfy+cILmvi5hfk3Iq8MAZsgtW+A/otQsJvK2wRatLE61RbzkX8 9/OXEZ1zT7t/q2RiJqzpvV8NChxIj+P7WTtepPm9AIj0Keue+gS2qvzAZAY34ZZeRHgA7g5O4TPJ /oTd+4rgiU++wLDlcZYd/slFkaT3xg4qWDepEMjT4T1qFOQIL+ijUArYS4owpPg9NISTKa1qqKWJ jFoyms0d0GwOniIIbBvhI2MJ7BSY9MYtWVT5jJO3tsVHwj4cp92CSFuGwunFMzCCA18wggJHoAMC AQICCwQAAAAAASFYUwiiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBCwUAMEwxIDAeBgNVBAsTF0dsb2JhbFNpZ24gUm9v dCBDQSAtIFIzMRMwEQYDVQQKEwpHbG9iYWxTaWduMRMwEQYDVQQDEwpHbG9iYWxTaWduMB4XDTA5 MDMxODEwMDAwMFoXDTI5MDMxODEwMDAwMFowTDEgMB4GA1UECxMXR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBSb290IENB IC0gUjMxEzARBgNVBAoTCkdsb2JhbFNpZ24xEzARBgNVBAMTCkdsb2JhbFNpZ24wggEiMA0GCSqG SIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDMJXaQeQZ4Ihb1wIO2hMoonv0FdhHFrYhy/EYCQ8eyip0E XyTLLkvhYIJG4VKrDIFHcGzdZNHr9SyjD4I9DCuul9e2FIYQebs7E4B3jAjhSdJqYi8fXvqWaN+J J5U4nwbXPsnLJlkNc96wyOkmDoMVxu9bi9IEYMpJpij2aTv2y8gokeWdimFXN6x0FNx04Druci8u nPvQu7/1PQDhBjPogiuuU6Y6FnOM3UEOIDrAtKeh6bJPkC4yYOlXy7kEkmho5TgmYHWyn3f/kRTv riBJ/K1AFUjRAjFhGV64l++td7dkmnq/X8ET75ti+w1s4FRpFqkD2m7pg5NxdsZphYIXAgMBAAGj QjBAMA4GA1UdDwEB/wQEAwIBBjAPBgNVHRMBAf8EBTADAQH/MB0GA1UdDgQWBBSP8Et/qC5FJK5N UPpjmove4t0bvDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQsFAAOCAQEAS0DbwFCq/sgM7/eWVEVJu5YACUGssxOGhigH M8pr5nS5ugAtrqQK0/Xx8Q+Kv3NnSoPHRHt44K9ubG8DKY4zOUXDjuS5V2yq/BKW7FPGLeQkbLmU Y/vcU2hnVj6DuM81IcPJaP7O2sJTqsyQiunwXUaMld16WCgaLx3ezQA3QY/tRG3XUyiXfvNnBB4V 14qWtNPeTCekTBtzc3b0F5nCH3oO4y0IrQocLP88q1UOD5F+NuvDV0m+4S4tfGCLw0FREyOdzvcy a5QBqJnnLDMfOjsl0oZAzjsshnjJYS8Uuu7bVW/fhO4FCU29KNhyztNiUGUe65KXgzHZs7XKR1g/ XzCCBUkwggQxoAMCAQICDDGs4Qlq5OZK9mcDzTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQsFADBbMQswCQYDVQQGEwJC RTEZMBcGA1UEChMQR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBudi1zYTExMC8GA1UEAxMoR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBHQ0MgUjMg UGVyc29uYWxTaWduIDIgQ0EgMjAyMDAeFw0yMjA5MTAxMzMzNDFaFw0yNTA5MTAxMzMzNDFaMIGM MQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTjESMBAGA1UECBMJS2FybmF0YWthMRIwEAYDVQQHEwlCYW5nYWxvcmUxFjAU BgNVBAoTDUJyb2FkY29tIEluYy4xFDASBgNVBAMTC0JvYiBNY01haG9uMScwJQYJKoZIhvcNAQkB Fhhib2IubWNtYWhvbkBicm9hZGNvbS5jb20wggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIB AQDBfX3nsBFRdO26im8lhOadVadRmV/YWK+U9OoGlTE+2MDsjJwO5p/Q6iaTUropqMRH1E+EIuhe /OU6a3/btrqzARE77RaVSdz5swXt7M4ciN+z44nIEx36UQIlFLsBFa3is/J/QLFhTUFFf0wLJsUO wyja+KvygH/E5TyfeXf5T2Y2wjGZx8jQXZMDmNpfANlEBYDfzCNYcAIQNox8FuPpEpuxWvv7jvxV X5dfkSef9T/DbsDM0PeTVMVyYIQoRSMBIGxVkaqp0MJglvQ2mU4CXcoOGgm6XC8LoLoEvYojXFKC fRgCOT5xeMR10UPSBQIljKwt7fPhpYVY+jTtOclpAgMBAAGjggHZMIIB1TAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMC BaAwgaMGCCsGAQUFBwEBBIGWMIGTME4GCCsGAQUFBzAChkJodHRwOi8vc2VjdXJlLmdsb2JhbHNp Z24uY29tL2NhY2VydC9nc2djY3IzcGVyc29uYWxzaWduMmNhMjAyMC5jcnQwQQYIKwYBBQUHMAGG NWh0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLmdsb2JhbHNpZ24uY29tL2dzZ2NjcjNwZXJzb25hbHNpZ24yY2EyMDIwME0G A1UdIARGMEQwQgYKKwYBBAGgMgEoCjA0MDIGCCsGAQUFBwIBFiZodHRwczovL3d3dy5nbG9iYWxz aWduLmNvbS9yZXBvc2l0b3J5LzAJBgNVHRMEAjAAMEkGA1UdHwRCMEAwPqA8oDqGOGh0dHA6Ly9j cmwuZ2xvYmFsc2lnbi5jb20vZ3NnY2NyM3BlcnNvbmFsc2lnbjJjYTIwMjAuY3JsMCMGA1UdEQQc MBqBGGJvYi5tY21haG9uQGJyb2FkY29tLmNvbTATBgNVHSUEDDAKBggrBgEFBQcDBDAfBgNVHSME GDAWgBSWM9HmWBdbNHWKgVZk1b5I3qGPzzAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUpG/4RP1YQA/iXGens9pIRe7CQxMw DQYJKoZIhvcNAQELBQADggEBACfWLy4qJyCnOa3sl4LEDAMU/gmJ6LbclGE5iR4KanAmlAt92gzN 5lSy/iE+wsRrXiHI7YKFgXX1kVK/RqMiPRrw4hq2j8nxoSi/VFiyS3CsfVMGkbY7HBTlBvla/tH+ +2nJprlXbJyz1GdvoJAeam5RvTWotcCGAjZmMa3U3zMkszgXN849xe3dUK1DauUGiInXEwEdXDcA /0CVjL3EEMj+kNWcLhrSZKwFtxggUyMW3XWRaAeAL9wOtEaXYqlgbtnV0n9FuoV2TNm3h7Mh7rjV I2zM+IZ3DE+XFK7dcPwte33u75QyySNJ3UMZqi25CO85yl8Bmo7aWRm99N7HGnkxggJtMIICaQIB ATBrMFsxCzAJBgNVBAYTAkJFMRkwFwYDVQQKExBHbG9iYWxTaWduIG52LXNhMTEwLwYDVQQDEyhH bG9iYWxTaWduIEdDQyBSMyBQZXJzb25hbFNpZ24gMiBDQSAyMDIwAgwxrOEJauTmSvZnA80wDQYJ YIZIAWUDBAIBBQCggdQwLwYJKoZIhvcNAQkEMSIEIAw0FkaApLQPDUpjrMXwxgZs26sFWdV/Pxlh bXDgeqTaMBgGCSqGSIb3DQEJAzELBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTI0MDkwMzE1 NDI0N1owaQYJKoZIhvcNAQkPMVwwWjALBglghkgBZQMEASowCwYJYIZIAWUDBAEWMAsGCWCGSAFl AwQBAjAKBggqhkiG9w0DBzALBgkqhkiG9w0BAQowCwYJKoZIhvcNAQEHMAsGCWCGSAFlAwQCATAN BgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASCAQA2pBvXVYy1PRy+GWr6fKq2atRWh7DHWT1slkn6HlyIeuG1AHuZCaVF FB1cJW+JruueBMoplR2rXsNrdxvFV10OszhwwaJFiPTI7fs7Fvzl617WiIAbgLZn+VrOxvbSoTDR JFDRLi3VliJGokoaTw1R5ERJkPnAkEYiOiEuticSkO2m6cukMVqY76npuIKpa+hfqUYBalPCZtIs 6WOlNYOHQu/ATNHTyhp+HNPDFnQUrF+uL3jaoyptsM4kdyJqrNpz7YY08OE2+l/BsFDVNxnUxwDb ReLc2N7JwpJpPAbLVDPYUIbk0WL2f8XWmBmQFAigANVkCwtWn+hCH9bvtUtn --000000000000ca80e5062138e81d--