Re: [Mip4] Some comments on WGLC:draft-ietf-mip4-mobike-connectivity-01.txt

> The problem is that if there are any statements about using
> RFC3846-style FAAs, the document also has to talk about security issues
> with masquerading FAs. I'm not sure that is worth getting into. But, I'd
> be fine with such text, as long as the security implications are
> appropriately pointed out. 
>
> Regards,
> Vidya
>
>   

It wasn't a good idea at all to mix implementation and specification. 
I'll simply pull back anything I've proposed along with "Besides that, a 
good assumption is often a good idea....." It will just confuse people 
and possibly delay the draft.

What matters is that the draft doesn't prevent these things by 
overspecifying the order events of which things could be made. Then I'm 
happy.

Best regards
/// Hasse

-- 
Mip4 mailing list: Mip4@ietf.org
    Web interface: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
     Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/