This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/ipv6-wg@ripe.net/
[ipv6-wg] [address-policy-wg] [Merging ipv6 and address policy mailing lists]
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [address-policy-wg] [Merging ipv6 and address policy mailing lists]
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [address-policy-wg] [Merging ipv6 and address policy mailing lists]
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Thu Nov 13 14:21:45 CET 2014
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 01:53:21PM +0100, Wilfried Woeber wrote:
> [...]
> > That said, if I was more involved with the address policy WG, I'd also
> > expect to get involved if someone proposed to dump some other WG
> > discussions into "my" mailing list.
>
> Also donning my (past) DB-WG hat for a minute, there's always the possibility
> to include an item like "input from other WGs or TFs" into the WG Meeting's
> draft agenda. I have done that for years, and it worked quite OK (for the
> most recent time in London, receiving input from Routing. So, *that*is no
> reason in my books to talk about dismantling a useful and active WG.
>
> No rocket science here, just a tad of looking across the fence :-)
Fully agree. And, to come back to where this whole thread started - while
IPv6 WG doesn't *do* policy by charter, there are people in the IPv6 WG
who are interested in IPv6 address policy, but do not regularily follow
the AP WG list. Which is why Erik threw the ball over the fence "you
might be interested in this, so here's a notification so you don't miss it".
And, speaking as a member of the IPv6 community, I do not think the idea
to dismantle the IPv6 WG (or it's list) has much merit - there are still
operational technical challenges to IPv6, and it's thus useful to have
a WG focusing on these. AP will take care of addressing challenges (and
if AP does policy things that do not work out operationally, they listen).
Gert Doering
-- some relevant hats
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/ipv6-wg/attachments/20141113/a5c23599/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [address-policy-wg] [Merging ipv6 and address policy mailing lists]
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [address-policy-wg] [Merging ipv6 and address policy mailing lists]
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]