My pleasure! Sent from my iPhone > On 24 Sep 2020, at 17:08, Fernando Gont <fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, Klaas, > > Thanks so much for your feedback! In-line.... > >> On 24/9/20 09:16, Klaas Wierenga via Datatracker wrote: >> Reviewer: Klaas Wierenga >> Review result: Ready >> I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's >> ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the >> IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the >> security area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat >> these comments just like any other last call comments. >> The document is clear and well-written. I believe that the workarounds >> presented are a bit weak, but I guess the future work will address the issue in >> a more fundamental manner. > > FWIW, the "workarounds" presented in this document are somewhat limited, because they suggest the things one might do without modifying the underlying protocols (i.e., operational mitigations). > > Indeed, other work being pursued (draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum and draft-ietf-6man-slaac-renum) discuss how to mitigate the problem in a more comprehensive and effective manner. > > Thanks! > > CHeers, > -- > Fernando Gont > SI6 Networks > e-mail: fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 > > > > -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
