On Wed, 18 Mar 2015, joel jaeggli wrote:
> We got a new version of this draft on 2/25 which I kinda of lost track
> of in the midst of two IESG review calls.
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?difftype=--hwdiff&url2=draft-ietf-opsec-dhcpv6-shield-06.txt
> 
> It stops short of  my interpretation  of Ted's position, with the
> reordered and clarified test in section 3. 

The text in Section 3 seems to have dropped the step saying that if 
the packet is identified to be a DHCPv6 packet meant for a DHCPv6 
client then DHCPv6-Shield MUST drop the packet.

The new explanatory text in the security considerations looks good 
to me.


//cmh

_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec

Reply via email to