Re: [secdir] Secdir telechat review of draft-bchv-rfc6890bis-06

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

You probably should, to be honest, just for convention. But I'm willing to
defer to others on this topic.

-Ekr


On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 5:22 AM, Brian Haberman <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hi Brian,
>      Thanks for the review. I will wait for the Security ADs to
> determine if they want a "blank" Security Considerations section added.
>
> Regards,
> Brian
>
>
> On 4/14/17 1:53 PM, Brian Weis wrote:
> > Reviewer: Brian Weis
> > Review result: Ready
> >
> > I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
> > ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
> > IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
> > security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat
> > these comments just like any other last call comments.
> >
> > This five page document clarifies that the intent of the term "global"
> > in RFC 6809 is for a special-purpose address to be "globally
> > reachable". It also corrects some errors in the IANA Special-Purpose
> > Address Registries.
> >
> > Since the scope of "global" is clarified rather than changed, there
> > does not seem to be any additional security considerations.  None of
> > the error corrections introduce additional security considerations
> > either.  The authors obviously came to the same conclusion since they
> > did not include a Security Considerations section. This does not
> > concern me personally, and I'll leave it for the Security ADs to
> > determine if they prefer one added that states "there are no security
> > considerations".
> >
> > I consider the document Ready.
> >
> > Brian Weis
> >
>
>