[ipv6-wg] A Modest IPv6-wg Proposal

On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 14:45 +0200, Shane Kerr wrote:
> But honestly, I don't see the point. Surely we can
> find something better to do with our time than see another chart showing
> IPv6 traffic rise 20% (*)?
> 
> 
> As Gert noted, IPv6 discussion should naturally move to wider forums. I
> actually quite like his idea of having an IPv4 working group - or
> perhaps we should call it the Post-Exhaustion Working Group.

>From the RIR perspective I agree on both points. It is however worth
noticing that the RIPE-meetings traditionally have served a bigger role,
comparable to that of the combined ARIN+NANOG meetings. Maybe this
should be part of a wider discussion of the function of RIPE meetings,
and/or whether there are other alternatives for the European operators
community to share their experiences.


//per