Thank you for your quick answer Ian.
VR: yes, I now understand what you meant.
VR: if I follow your logic and if I correctly understand, DoS attacks are already discussed in RFC 8415 and could be removed from this document since there’s nothing specific to YANG. My point is to highlight that risks are not limited to DoS, unlike what is currently suggested. Maybe: Old: * Various attacks based on re-configuring the contents of DHCPv6 options. For example, changing the address of a the DNS server supplied in a DHCP option to point to a rogue server. New: * Various attacks based on re-configuring the contents of DHCPv6 options, leading to several types of security or privacy threats. For example, changing the address of a the DNS server supplied in a DHCP option to point to a rogue server.
VR: indeed, RFC 7824 is a key reference and must be referenced by your document. Thanks for adding it.
VR: yes.
VR: okay, forget what I said, I was not aware. Cheers, Vincent |
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call