Last Call Review of draft-gundavelli-v6ops-pmipv6-address-reservations-
review-gundavelli-v6ops-pmipv6-address-reservations-secdir-lc-kivinen-2011-08-14-00

Request Review of draft-gundavelli-v6ops-pmipv6-address-reservations
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 06)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2011-08-26
Requested 2011-08-01
Other Reviews
Review State Completed
Reviewer Tero Kivinen
Review review-gundavelli-v6ops-pmipv6-address-reservations-secdir-lc-kivinen-2011-08-14
Posted at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir/current/msg02828.html
Draft last updated 2011-08-14
Review completed: 2011-08-14

Review
review-gundavelli-v6ops-pmipv6-address-reservations-secdir-lc-kivinen-2011-08-14

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.

This document does two IANA allocations, one for the reserved IPv6
interface identifier for Proxy Mobile IPv6 and another for the
reserved IANA Ethernet unicast address for the Proxy Mobile IPv6. The
security considerations section points to the Proxy Mobile IPv6 RFC
(RFC5213) and Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers RFC (RFC 5453)
saying there is no additional security considerations known at this
point of time beyond them.

Only thing that seems bit odd, that there is no obvious point where
the allocated reserved IANA values would be inserted, so I do not know
whether the final values will be put to the RFC or whether users of
them need to go to the IANA registries to find the values. If users
are required to find the values from the IANA registries, adding
direct pointer to the registry might be useful. 
-- 
kivinen at iki.fi