In your previous mail you wrote: I disagree about 6to4: I wouldn't say security considerations is an explicit section as such, and certainly not about _this_ kind of attacks. Just a rather vague notes. => no, we come back to the last week discussion...
Also note that autotunnel spec does not require that destination address must be compatible address when decapsulating. There's not all that much about source either. => autotunnel ist phased out. Security issues are one of the reasons but in fact 6to4 is better (including from the security point of view). > PS: I agree blind decapsulation is bad but this is not a scoop. Good we agree on blind decapsulation. I dislike that security was not discussed properly in the main context of the draft; more like as just an afterthough "for you security geeks, here are a few possible problems.." => let someelse answer... [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
