[OPSEC] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-host-scanning-07: (with COMMENT)

["Spencer Dawkins" <[e-mail]>]

Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-host-scanning-07: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-host-scanning/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I echo Barry's "nice document", and would support the changes he
suggested.

I did notice what I believe is a repeated "not" in "it is not not only
the lowest-order byte".

In this text:

3.4.1.  Remote IPv6 Network Scanners

   Many address scanning tools such as nmap [nmap2012] do not even
   support sweeping an IPv6 address range.
                           ^ 
does this mean "sweeping an IPv6 address range in a remote IPv6 network"?
I think that's implicit from the section title, but what nmap supports is
clearer in the corresponding text in the next section:

3.4.2.  Local IPv6 Network Scanners

   There are a variety of publicly-available local IPv6 network
   scanners:

   o  Current versions of nmap [nmap2012] implement this functionality.