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/