Margaret asked 2 points: 11. Security Considerations
>> In the IPsec section, you mention that other security issues >> will be covered in the Security Considerations section, but >> I don't see any issues here... >> >> Why aren't privacy addresses covered in this document? Should this be covered in the security section? Already, section 4.5.3 talks about privacy extensions. Do we need more? 4.5.3 Privacy Extensions for Address Configuration in IPv6 - RFC3041 Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration [RFC-3041] SHOULD be supported. It is recommended that this behavior be configurable on a connection basis within each application when available. It is noted that a number of applications do not work with addresses generated with this method, while other applications work quite well with them. >> Also, did you consider a recommendation that IPv6 nodes should >> implement SEND? Perhaps you should at least mention the >> security issues with ND and indicate that the SEND group is >> working to resolve them? I believe we did not want this kind of forward reference to stuff that is on-going. However, if people feel that the SEND stuff is stable enough, we could put in a reference. thanks, John -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
