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 is just a short, informational document that reserved two new address ranges for example use. I have no significant issues with it. I do have two minor questions: 1. The document does have normative language, telling operators what they SHOULD and SHOULD NOT do with this addresses, and it instructs IANA not to allocate addresses from these blocks. Should it be BCP, rather than Informational? It doesn't matter terribly, so I'm just asking the question. 2. The Security Considerations section says the document has no security implications, but I'm not sure that's correct. By calling out certain addresses as examples, we might be inviting malefactors to try to snag traffic meant for these addresses in an attempt to trick those who use the example addresses as though they were real. If the advice in the Operational Implications section isn't followed, that would result in an opportunity for fraud, for example. I look at this as an explanation of the importance of following the Operational Implications advice. Again, I consider this a minor point, and the document should certainly go forward. Barry