Last Call Review of draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-03
review-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-03-secdir-lc-ladd-2017-06-09-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 13)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2017-06-06
Requested 2017-05-23
Other Reviews Genart Last Call review of -02 by Joel Halpern (diff)
Intdir Last Call review of -02 by Jouni Korhonen (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -03 by Tim Chown (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -03 by Joel Halpern (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -02 by Sarah Banks (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -07 by Joel Halpern (diff)
Review State Completed
Reviewer Watson Ladd
Review review-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-03-secdir-lc-ladd-2017-06-09
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/80ls8e6y6tYx44_R-4r7rri0kxM
Reviewed rev. 03 (document currently at 13)
Review result Has Nits
Last updated 2017-06-09

Review
review-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-03-secdir-lc-ladd-2017-06-09

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 summary of the review is that this document is has one substantial
issue plus a formatting nit: the author names are running into the title.
Perhaps this can be fixed

The substantial comment is that the interaction of privacy addresses with
giving each subscriber a unique IPv6 address prefix space is not discussed
in this document at all. This seems like a security issue that should be
addressed as it reduces privacy compared to a shared prefix for all users.
(Or maybe I am completely wrong: I do not know IPv6 in great detail). At
minimum it should be discussed in the security considerations section, even
if explicitly dismissed.

Sincerely,
Watson