Document: draft-jones-opsec-04.txt
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Date: April 14, 204

Sorry, there is no way I can seriously review this in time.

The only red flag I saw was:

>  While the examples given are written with IPv4 in mind, most of the
>  requirements are general enough to apply to IPv6.

As I've said before, RFCs shouldn't make IPv6 look like a poor cousin.
Also, there are differences with IPv6 - no presumption of NAT for example.
The draft doesn't appear to regard NAT as a security feature, which is good-
but IPv6 ought to make e2e IPSEC a realistic option. So I'm wondering if
it's OK to ignore that issue.