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.

I believe this document is ready. 

The security considerations section refers to RFC9197 and RFC9326 for complete treatment of packet amplification, integrity, and covert channel risks. The last half of the security considerations paragraph does allude to a multicast tree configuration preference that would be better as a non-option (strictly from a security perspective - why allow a non-/less-secure state at all if you can avoid it?). But, I don't know enough about the challenges of achieving and/or enforcing that configuration option.