May I suggest that this draft, at the bare minimum, has RFC 9099 (an OPSEC document) in its references list? Notably because the draft sections about network correlation is already addressed in RFC 9099 section 2.6 and others.
Regards -éric On 30/03/2023, 10:03, "OPSEC on behalf of Jen Linkova" <opsec-boun...@ietf.org <mailto:opsec-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of furr...@gmail.com <mailto:furr...@gmail.com>> wrote: This email starts the OpSec WG adoption call for draft-gont-opsec-ipv6-addressing https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-opsec-ipv6-addressing/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-opsec-ipv6-addressing/>. The call ends on Thu, Apr 13th, 23:59:59 UTC. Please review the draft and send your comments to the list. -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry _______________________________________________ OPSEC mailing list OPSEC@ietf.org <mailto:OPSEC@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec> _______________________________________________ OPSEC mailing list OPSEC@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
