Re: [OPSEC] WGLC on draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-implications-on-ipv4-nets-02

On Jan 25, 2013, at 5:11 AM, Alec Waters <Alec.Waters@dataline.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi Joel,
> 
>> if the third citation is factually incorrect in some fashion it should be dropped.
>> 
>>       [Waters2011] provides an example of how this could be achieved
>>       using publicly available tools (besides incorrectly claiming the
>>       discovery of a "0day vulnerability").
> 
> If the reference is deemed of value to the draft, I (as author of the reference) can reproduce it at another location minus all the 0day nonsense put in there by the "editors" at Infosec Institute.

<no hat>
Personally I think that that would be useful, although another option would be for Fernando to remove the somewhat snide parenthetical…
</no hat>
> 
> alec
> -- 
> _______________________________________________
> OPSEC mailing list
> OPSEC@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
> 

--
"When it comes to glittering objects, wizards have all the taste and self-control of a deranged magpie."
-- Terry Pratchett