With all due respect, I've read draft-prigent-dhcpv6-threats-00.txt. The authors based this doc on an old draft of the DHCPv6, which they did not understand very well.
- Ralph At 02:39 PM 3/7/2002 +0100, Francis Dupont wrote: > In your previous mail you wrote: > > But I don't really care about your opinion or others on what should be > used or not used from the work we do in the IETF. > >=> I disagree: the resources of IETF are not infinite so waste is >a common concern. > > What I care about is if you find a technical hole or error in our > protocol specifications or interoperablity issues. > >=> I'd like to see any of the security concerns of >draft-prigent-dhcpv6-threats-00.txt addressed, or >a proof that "the capability of automatic allocation of >reusable network addresses" has a meaning for IPv6 addresses >(note that we have 5 years of proof of the opposite). > >Regards > >[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] >-------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
