<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
<!-- generated by https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc version 1.6.20 (Ruby 3.0.2) -->
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-chuang-relay-flow-identifier-02" category="exp" consensus="true" submissionType="IETF" tocInclude="true" sortRefs="true" symRefs="true" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.16.0 -->
  <front>
    <title abbrev="Relay Flow Identifier">Relay Flow Identifier</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-chuang-relay-flow-identifier-02"/>
    <author fullname="Weihaw Chuang">
      <organization>Google, Inc.</organization>
      <address>
        <email>weihaw@google.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2023" month="January" day="19"/>
    <workgroup>Independent Stream</workgroup>
    <keyword>DKIM</keyword>
    <keyword>ARC</keyword>
    <keyword>Relay</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <t>To prevent spammers from using relay forwarding, we propose to identify relay flows.  We do this by having relays categorize their authenticated traffic flows and publish to receivers identifiers associated with those flows.  This is a unique, persistent over time, relay flow identifier name that is secured by some digital signature.  Receivers can use this identifier to help categorize traffic through the relay and use that identifier to apply fine-grain anti-abuse policies instead of on the entire traffic through the relay.  This document provides a specification for DKIM (<xref target="RFC6376"/>) for originating traffic and ARC <xref target="RFC8617"/> for forwarded traffic.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <section anchor="introduction">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>Spammers utilize relays to obfuscate their identities and often to spoof some other identity with email receivers.  For example a spammer may exploit the shared tenancy vulnerability of SPF to spoof some identity as follows.  It finds a relay that hosts many different enterprise customers who include the relay's IPs in their SPF policies.  The spammer then sends traffic through the relay assuming the identity of one of those customers i.e. it spoofs the MAIL FROM identity of the victim domain. While the SPF validation (if done) of the initial send by the spammer to the relay fails, a subsequent SPF validation when forwarded to some other victim receiver from the relay will pass SPF because the IPs are contained in the victim's SPF policy.  At some point, the receiver notices the spam via the relay and wants to apply anti-abuse counter measures.  With existing authentication methods, this policy would impact all mail flows through that relay, both innocent and malicious.  A better approach would be to selectively apply anti-abuse counter measures to the spammer's flow which is what this proposal enables.  Better yet, the receiver is enabled to cluster traffic to a spammer controlled domain and apply policies scoped to what the spammers have control over.</t>
      <section anchor="terminology-and-definitions">
        <name>Terminology and Definitions</name>
        <t>Acronyms</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>Authenticated Received Chain (ARC) <xref target="RFC8617"/> - is a protocol that is meant to resolve some of the issues for DMARC <xref target="RFC7489"/> to fix the problems that DMARC policy rejects caused by mail forwarding, and is based on DKIM, but suffers from similar issues as DKIM replay. ARC defines digital signatures and Authentication-Results by ADMD and a versioning mechanism for them.</li>
          <li>Authentication-Results <xref target="RFC8601"/>- A header containing a list of validation results and comments.</li>
          <li>
            <t>DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) <xref target="RFC6376"/>- IETF standard for the cryptographic protocol to authenticate email at the domain level and protect the integrity of messages during transit.
            </t>
            <ul spacing="normal">
              <li>DKIM replay- <xref target="RFC6376"/> section 8.6 defines a vulnerability called DKIM Replay as a spam message sent through a SMTP MTA DKIM signer, that then is sent to many more recipients, leveraging the reputation of the signer.</li>
            </ul>
          </li>
          <li>Sender Policy Framework (SPF) <xref target="RFC7208"/>- IETF standard for authenticating sending servers typically based on IP address.</li>
        </ul>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="relay-flow-identifier-specification">
      <name>Relay Flow Identifier Specification</name>
      <t>This specification defines an identifier name for mail traversing a relay.  Typically the relay uses password authentication such as methods provided for in <xref target="RFC4954"/> but other methods MAY be possible.  This identifier MAY also be used for authenticated forwarding flows such as mailing lists and with other authentication methods such DKIM or SPF that verify who the sender is.  Because some traffic may have originated at the relay, which traditionally may be DKIM signed, this document provides a specification for DKIM (<xref target="RFC6376"/>).  In other instances, the relay forwards traffic originated elsewhere, and these are typically not DKIM signed by the relay, so instead this document provides a specification using ARC (<xref target="RFC8617"/>).</t>
      <t>Email Service Providers can delegate relay and forwarding services to enterprise customers, typically associated with some customer domain.  Spammers utilize these features either by acting as an enterprise customer or by hijacked accounts.  This specification proposes naming flows by enterprise customers to help the email receiver with categorization and application of anti-abuse counter measures.  As some mechanisms for mail forwarding such as mailing lists are often opaque after being sent and problematic for debug and abuse protection, this offers a naming scheme to help identify those mechanisms.</t>
      <section anchor="flow-identification">
        <name>Flow Identification</name>
        <t>The relaying service choosing to use this specification MUST categorize and name relayed traffic flows such that receivers can do anti-abuse analysis upon them if necessary.  In order for the identifier to be effective, it SHOULD be persistent in time and uniquely named across all flows through the relay.  As relayed traffic flow is often associated with a delegated domain, the first part of the identifier MUST either include a domain associated url-safe base64 (<xref target="RFC4648"/>) token, or be empty if no such delegated domain is present.  It MAY include a local part url-safe base64 (<xref target="RFC4648"/>) token after the domain token and separated by a period '.'.  This local part token can help describe the mail forwarding mechanism.  Combined the domain token and the optional local token form the relay flow identifier name.  If a message is associated with more than one flow, the relay SHOULD select the more specific flow based on local policy.  That name MUST not be any relay internal name though MAY be a secure cryptographic hash of such.  Also that name MUST not contain or be associated with any Personally Identifiable Information (PII).  The parser should ignore commas '+' whose use may be specified in the future.</t>
        <t>Example valid names:</t>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
0123456789
0123456789.abcdwxyz
.abcdwxyz
<empty>
]]></artwork>
      </section>
      <section anchor="dkim">
        <name>DKIM</name>
        <t>This proposes a new DKIM <xref target="RFC8617"/> DKIM-Signature tag-value that identifies the presence of a relay flow and a relay flow identifier name.  The tag is defined "rfid", while the value name consists of a domain url-safe base64 token and the optional local url-safe base64 token separated by a period.   The token parsers MUST ignore a reserved plus that may be further specified in the future.</t>
        <t>Example:</t>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=example.com; s=20230116; h=...; bh=...; b....=; rfid=0123456789.abcdwxyz
]]></artwork>
      </section>
      <section anchor="arc">
        <name>ARC</name>
        <t>This proposes a new ARC <xref target="RFC8617"/> ARC-Authentication-Result defined method (<xref target="RFC8601"/>) that identifies the presence of a relay flow and its property that identifies a relay flow identifier name.  The defined method is "relay", which when present, takes a single result value of "pass" that indicates the relay was authenticated.   The relay method will have a propspec tag-value with a policy ptype with a "id" property i.e "policy.id" that takes a single token value.  That token value consists of a domain url-safe base64 token and the optional local url-safe base64 token separated by a period.  The token parsers MUST ignore a reserved plus that may be further specified in the future.</t>
        <t>Example:</t>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; auth.example.com; relay=pass (comments) policy.id=0123456789.abcdwxyz
]]></artwork>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="privacy-considerations">
      <name>Privacy Considerations</name>
    </section>
    <section anchor="security-considerations">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
    </section>
    <section anchor="iana-considerations">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <t>This document has no IANA actions yet.</t>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references>
      <name>Normative References</name>
      <reference anchor="RFC6376">
        <front>
          <title>DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures</title>
          <author fullname="D. Crocker" initials="D." role="editor" surname="Crocker">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="T. Hansen" initials="T." role="editor" surname="Hansen">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="M. Kucherawy" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Kucherawy">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="September" year="2011"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) permits a person, role, or organization that owns the signing domain to claim some responsibility for a message by associating the domain with the message.  This can be an author's organization, an operational relay, or one of their agents.  DKIM separates the question of the identity of the Signer of the message from the purported author of the message.  Assertion of responsibility is validated through a cryptographic signature and by querying the Signer's domain directly to retrieve the appropriate public key.  Message transit from author to recipient is through relays that typically make no substantive change to the message content and thus preserve the DKIM signature.</t>
            <t>This memo obsoletes RFC 4871 and RFC 5672.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="STD" value="76"/>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6376"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6376"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8617">
        <front>
          <title>The Authenticated Received Chain (ARC) Protocol</title>
          <author fullname="K. Andersen" initials="K." surname="Andersen">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="B. Long" initials="B." role="editor" surname="Long">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="S. Blank" initials="S." role="editor" surname="Blank">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="M. Kucherawy" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Kucherawy">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="July" year="2019"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The Authenticated Received Chain (ARC) protocol provides an authenticated "chain of custody" for a message, allowing each entity that handles the message to see what entities handled it before and what the message's authentication assessment was at each step in the handling.</t>
            <t>ARC allows Internet Mail Handlers to attach assertions of message authentication assessment to individual messages.  As messages traverse ARC-enabled Internet Mail Handlers, additional ARC assertions can be attached to messages to form ordered sets of ARC assertions that represent the authentication assessment at each step of the message-handling paths.</t>
            <t>ARC-enabled Internet Mail Handlers can process sets of ARC assertions to inform message disposition decisions, identify Internet Mail Handlers that might break existing authentication mechanisms, and convey original authentication assessments across trust boundaries.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8617"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8617"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7489">
        <front>
          <title>Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance (DMARC)</title>
          <author fullname="M. Kucherawy" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Kucherawy">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="E. Zwicky" initials="E." role="editor" surname="Zwicky">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="March" year="2015"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance (DMARC) is a scalable mechanism by which a mail-originating organization can express domain-level policies and preferences for message validation, disposition, and reporting, that a mail-receiving organization can use to improve mail handling.</t>
            <t>Originators of Internet Mail need to be able to associate reliable and authenticated domain identifiers with messages, communicate policies about messages that use those identifiers, and report about mail using those identifiers.  These abilities have several benefits: Receivers can provide feedback to Domain Owners about the use of their domains; this feedback can provide valuable insight about the management of internal operations and the presence of external domain name abuse.</t>
            <t>DMARC does not produce or encourage elevated delivery privilege of authenticated email.  DMARC is a mechanism for policy distribution that enables increasingly strict handling of messages that fail authentication checks, ranging from no action, through altered delivery, up to message rejection.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7489"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7489"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8601">
        <front>
          <title>Message Header Field for Indicating Message Authentication Status</title>
          <author fullname="M. Kucherawy" initials="M." surname="Kucherawy">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="May" year="2019"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document specifies a message header field called "Authentication-Results" for use with electronic mail messages to indicate the results of message authentication efforts.  Any receiver-side software, such as mail filters or Mail User Agents (MUAs), can use this header field to relay that information in a convenient and meaningful way to users or to make sorting and filtering decisions.</t>
            <t>This document obsoletes RFC 7601.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8601"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8601"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7208">
        <front>
          <title>Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1</title>
          <author fullname="S. Kitterman" initials="S." surname="Kitterman">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="April" year="2014"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Email on the Internet can be forged in a number of ways.  In particular, existing protocols place no restriction on what a sending host can use as the "MAIL FROM" of a message or the domain given on the SMTP HELO/EHLO commands.  This document describes version 1 of the Sender Policy Framework (SPF) protocol, whereby ADministrative Management Domains (ADMDs) can explicitly authorize the hosts that are allowed to use their domain names, and a receiving host can check such authorization.</t>
            <t>This document obsoletes RFC 4408.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7208"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7208"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC4954">
        <front>
          <title>SMTP Service Extension for Authentication</title>
          <author fullname="R. Siemborski" initials="R." role="editor" surname="Siemborski">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="A. Melnikov" initials="A." role="editor" surname="Melnikov">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="July" year="2007"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines a Simple Mail Transport Protocol (SMTP) extension whereby an SMTP client may indicate an authentication mechanism to the server, perform an authentication protocol exchange, and optionally negotiate a security layer for subsequent protocol interactions during this session.  This extension includes a profile of the Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL) for SMTP.</t>
            <t>This document obsoletes RFC 2554.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4954"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4954"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC4648">
        <front>
          <title>The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings</title>
          <author fullname="S. Josefsson" initials="S." surname="Josefsson">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="October" year="2006"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes the commonly used base 64, base 32, and base 16 encoding schemes.  It also discusses the use of line-feeds in encoded data, use of padding in encoded data, use of non-alphabet characters in encoded data, use of different encoding alphabets, and canonical encodings.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4648"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4648"/>
      </reference>
    </references>
    <section anchor="acknowledgments">
      <name>Acknowledgments</name>
      <t>Thanks goes to Emil Gustafsson for suggesting a DKIM specification.</t>
    </section>
  </back>
  <!-- ##markdown-source:
H4sIAAAAAAAAA71ZXXcbtxF931+BKg+WWpGVZUW25aqnrG2lOokaHUk5OX0E
d0ES8e5iC2BFMznOb++dGewHKcZ1+xAfW5R3gcF83Jm5A04mkyzaWJoLdWdK
vVFXpVur68LU0S6s8SrT87k3j7/xOst1NEvnNxfKfGyyrHB5rSsIK7xexEm+
anW9nHjaOllg68T2Wycnp1lo55UNwbo6bhrsun7/cJXVbTU3/iIrIPoiy10d
TB3acKGib00GTV5ka+c/LL1rG2ypC9OYmsSq++iNrrLMNp5Xh3h6cvL65FRl
H8wGe4oLlamJevft9Q19zu7e0gcbluk2rpyXBZnCn0VblmLLj8au9Fq9ZWPk
pfNLXdufdYTqF+ob55alOYYu+ZRfm0rb8kKteePflvx6mruKX+aurSN5LMuy
2vkKQh5haGbrxeh/k8lE6XmIXucxyx6cahAFMjI0uqqMD2rhXaXaYKETO1hh
+1r7Ag+OcTQ2uMYFo6JTyeubbiEiEaYKhqnCqbiyQc03aqUfe1lBpcDanyFg
ZaxX5CCSQi8KeFcvFjYXUUrXhWraeWnDio7zJjewAjoO4caiEFxueffaRixc
kXadLg+kBf5q1db23y282WCTDZFsdhCmoq3wdLBgJFxRoCBQRxIRTN56nAKb
gsPzwi5t1KUKdlnriFc47q5XMdc1vGjEDSORsGNlymbLEcnouAL2lmSBSfqQ
A0QIqbAlRDdNCYVtbSZLr22NtdFO9JyWN660uTU4t4ahulBuoVzNckmE/8yR
ncuQcW1FPkK4H3EyeTA0Jsf5OcOTYMGQV4e//PKHu6u35y9enn/6dMTPYdfS
wikU+O4osgWpoWT1q/PnLz994sUJX0P0oYMAtbJFURrg+SvkQPSuaHM+Gq/v
O7i20ZbkxIQveMbNF20g9yaEid8i+YN0cAvEntaFxsEvHEqHlf3CjeCIk23A
HJS6grLmo66a0rA3WANVIU4oUqWzkd0YVppQgkN0nW/UY1vWxus5tIRkHHh/
e7Vzen+uRva5MiH3OlJ0C3K8gIFBAHDHgDPrDfC3WBhPMcI/4xtvEfoc1cmx
Y9YrJGidl21hhvA+C+r6lnCRfEPKdGjh0JveLkpLYJ40+AxAQ2grjvJqZAfD
zdCHJOOglJ0iS2wU6wPvupldf6eu7r6/2dpPbx4twl0BiohEPVU/rmwpppDW
j7q0hSDx0C6wqDZH3UZbI9yUmdCe0jWOzXIj9RcIcTimYLbzYFAeqNpvC1+T
G0YQdWPEJA07kEjtHMSvbVmqBj5ioXOTa0lmw0EATFC06wjjIFhCkiQ+C0Nk
KCVnUU5tnK3jcTohnVk7FE8TeiMhQu+UkDVqQxiKxqhScNMgEBsdUMG4ejP4
P6JEUlxH5Zm8URlEtAjHUtZEP7V2bQkDqgY9RWmYzJkjJXyADMDLGh2rOZwH
e2uXk79JwUoTBF1L58/gqEg6QVnvdL5K8ufccoIpTU69jOz4b9Z0wU6xh1e5
wK9XFlItpYiOyRJuaoAMsnZesh/+LlpszK7DsVxWMRqQYIHW9TniRrWBwuuR
0VgqKGZrRe++SIfcNSIr6WOGZozmaTop3K6mVA2/Ug/GI+1c6ZYS4XdmwaAH
q8myWe5dvanwW5b9EcxgttViU4sqQDxIoUPU5KPtojyRhgmfRJfj3K4Bwq2I
Fzfi4EooJpmQcg6VwATpCjdDnX959uo1RGLTwn7khRAL31VBxMraBCRvfkJw
qXcimpy5gqQRASFjiVdoWgBAUgcColokSEvlMPGXYCtbat9phcLKrcqbhnsc
nVmQy/DuSRuXNjHbAv7kzoS2jExoZu9u3kkcFTUGvKVEqUy+AncLFbsAe6vp
rvPHcjqHnzz/9AmUEZxAFwkwiApnngLvieTeUTXyaTsdD+JHHTrIOe8YX98a
9MCeRxfqhvx3SLZ3MZY2PWFOrEKEILi201nlftNEB0LRIEdGCHBbPC31xgTW
hOwSPLIUyoZtiGMqxaA5PhX1yoSgl+Tz1idqUAcbp0J+2YohSpMthYl9sQde
Tc/70Omd7pprTjUWcsdCKPKSjt3h1BRiX5a0ur95uFU3DzPZRSAw/liwyR2Q
iZ/Anrtu5TzXAttYcv4x2+31smuCUL6NEqyUGSJTonRPI4VXt4L3Kw9+SUOH
OkS57yL08vTk1f4IjYsxjqP2Jp+eKSeGHUsu2AzpcX2rdFEANYFJFYjU/nHs
fkztMBdQTdyme73P6ycEmVRjQCCenBGM3p5O9loNTQnpHbgx0vS022NCi+qs
Q9drOgYqLgDQxEtnr78+Aywo86UXd8tvZv+iXoFyHiwKTT8DDErTCl0GR8u4
0Oz4Vp6kkpP6WK8U7KSnlJuShkwWRYX9zVL2MrycMC5GFzxFoxPRNEaJIMNK
6xGmwPW1ayzEM7kddOQaaqYMTH1V+hrWF9wJ2Oe0C2YO4C5S7/6/CT5R07pj
zDXhE+zjeEyqxHcDbRwpbMpgwKi8kUqOTTCTiNCAXfCZsbodf0s2BtcPNV9o
hoyyVPEPx13uiBPiPeP2HgkEDqVuRUaa3gpQjSVVu4FIjWARZA9zjH38+3hk
0u6IynHtVvb8Vj2ZacQ9C5PakrHsdDgERIuTjNNxz+kENBq97U86/0A4yZka
9QPxtofSRB8omwfEY//euaIbYHma3JqRxLh+sBXhHeHpDkNR/Dz/nAXxT99Q
w1Bgxv7fn5DepAHPNRp8XukFiZ+bVC9j16CIgkChnGUXZt4uRVOZn6WBQd2U
LE6ohe48FHL0d9O7or8HkXFn0Dyxta1qO9TYhKwRmlS+co7xCtH97cF2tG5+
uH8Y3x6Q2lyGWdiTOxT2U2Lf47uJwo3joFEtNgFntY1cFFQKQ1WNHWiafpNy
3lOF6qjC9nUEaoyBk5iaH9OEd/+P73/47h1X4uHChYYcW4nOch9DCQ/lCaIe
FZvHh93JYbiaADb2Wak4RBT13UzTfRZ3DFwq1cJ6cKtG+9jz11F/IA+nZOsm
aN0T+OGE1peToBeG2+35WVdfzs7PXtFFSHQfDI6jVKRMaUBQyKdOQrKrl+Ip
xBBGZfinLjWcXjqUElH4S45NuB/Rs/QYjg8GYvhkqiQUHusK9Wz6rKsOo7Nk
F+GFgY76mns7lxl2NyN72EPOW1fNeazdqwE9dI30qHSavKSbynEn2XMdR85B
CenpnH16A8gUDZCv+RaChIzbUwKmDJJiCK3vkkwO7QlU8kU3iD9QInG2MUio
V80Jzt0VKNFdT1alm0NGcGIkOt0g7pDslQ4rAiGhgiBOxCQ+PSZNBglOT3AO
DW6RZ6nrd7WGplRkbroApquS2+vro3TRgwCj7KiwkvF9WTu+kKgqVNVnf3pG
zCQwQepIRHLRcFmxaNO1JxppuhfjWYVVDxcofr/++mt28vz0xdnX5y9fvR79
OtXzvFh/3PycDb/9hZPkr7xJCidfqQsb7ZsUirBZC0PYmlrpyeS+G+JU1MsJ
lGl3L09DGkIp03KeXvUYbTLXfRZ+5DtIJ+QJKS7UgV/Y4oAZWLqikqM5hPRV
AzcnPislw24SfzY59i/em8fQTxTkJRLiIChKESbreGJAHyzbNIanCC9az1Xv
CyLdRXfb7Rfq8fL5G6UvfdCTsNKnX5+/Ufkl+fOjKf6cPt+o4jJdpNLXF29U
uDw9OX1x8vw5Vq8up9PpGzXvPvFzevlGkYcv9+FnQAt98bIXLE+unfFgsncw
7yMq3H2gjDSnH/3vULJRlDE+bp7s/gKc7agD0w54z0HH9vl6MvUNVDn9QRgw
6nFp0m1BwiLUO6CR6yDpgdmRWEQY31cSoRzPQR2a5HVSgm81eRLhO6KGwDJK
t9R305VOQ9/Adc8OkCSDO+zUQCOprPRCZu5tCwTGLLirvqNHv3tq/a6Z9Zsg
DRfKcpbh5XQrjzhOl3zjfNhdDx2p3sefzR9MP/ZRI2RvyalgejpdJ+LVPTUu
umHZ8+569s/Zk+fb3yGhxRHv4ZWaeXWge9WpfMszx4zCkmb5h9qtS1MsWXGS
ousPQS2djFnvKxCObzCI6AXanwyooV0uTbqqTmPjmC3jiP8A26TeRYseAAA=

-->

</rfc>
