[v6ops] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-v6ops-conditional-ras-06: (with COMMENT)

[Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]>]

Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-v6ops-conditional-ras-06: 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-v6ops-conditional-ras/



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

I'll echo Mirja and Spencer's question about the "empty" security
considerations.  (I actually don't much care for the "This memo introduces no
new security considerations" formulation in general, unless it's literally the
only content of the section -- it's either followed by new security
considerations, in which it's just wrong, or followed by calling out specific
portions of the referenced security considerations that are particularly
relevant.  In the latter case, it seems useful to provide more of a lead-in
like "The general security considerations of [X] and[Y] apply, and in
particular [...]".)

Unfortunately, I don't seem to be in a good position to comment on actual
additions to the security considerations section, since I don't have a clear
picture of what the proposal in this document actually changes when compared to
current/normal practices.  This is presumably just a matter of my lacking the
appropriate background knowledge for the routing bits, but in a scenario like
Figure 3, with distinct edge and first-hop routers, what kind of RAs would the
first-hop routers normally be sending?  Would they be announcing the routes in
question here just without the PIO markings, or not advertising anything at
all, or something else?

Other than that, thanks for the well-written document!