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.




The draft is a discussion of the reasons why a stateless solution to mapping IPv4 addresses to IPv6 is desirable. As such the security considerations are probably best dealt with in the manner that the document addresses them, pointing out that a stateless approach has the advantage of not having state.




While the draft might have been a little easier to follow if it was a little more concrete, for example how is the statelessness to be achieved and what are the costs of this approach (which must presumably exist or else why use a statefull mapping), this will have to be addressed in any implementation draft.




-- 

Website: 

http://hallambaker.com/