[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: IPv6 WG Last Call:draft-ietf-ipv6-optimistic-dad-02.txt

On 2004-09-23, Pekka Savola wrote:
> 5. Security Considerations
>    Further work will be required to integrate Optimistic DAD with Secure
>    Neighbor Discovery [SEND].
> ==> sorry for not saying this earlier, but this seems unacceptable to
> me.  SEND specs are already in the RFC-ed queue, and the WG has been
> closed.  This IMHO needs to be analyzed here.  I.e., analyze and state
> how oDAD interacts (or not) with SEND.  AFAICS, there shouldn't be any
> showstoppers here..

Okay, I can see that.  I guess SEND ran past me while I wasn't
looking :-)  Would any of the ex-SEND-ites be able to help me 
out by reading the draft and suggesting a short bit of text --
as far as I can tell OptiDAD-02 and SEND-CGA "just works", because
version -02 no longer says anything about how addresses are

But are there any other SEND messages sent at address configuration
time which might cause harm in the case of an address collision?

> ==> s/::/the unspecified address/ (clearer when used in braces)
> ==> s/dependant/dependent/

No worries.

>    [MIPV6] D. Johnson, C. Perkins, J. Arkko. Mobility Support in IPv6,
>         revision 24 (draft-ietf-mobileip-ipv6-24).  June 2003 ...
>         Expired December 2003.
> ==> now RFC.

Argh!  I was sure I'd fixed that one!  



IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6