>>>> and the new lsas could not be used in path shortening attacks, >>>> right? >>> >>> this document only defines the format of the LSA’s it does not talk >>> about processing by the routing engines. >> >> so the secdir sees no need to warn about it. got it. </sarcasm> > > If secdir is going to warn about it through this process, then surely > the right place to do that is in the comments on the document that > does talk about processing by the routing engines? a naïve person might think that all documents in a series that have security implications would be flagged in the security considerations section. but i have had my say. let's get back to work. randy