[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 ]
Alex Semenyaka
alex.semenyaka at gmail.com
Thu Nov 13 17:09:29 CET 2014
Definitely +1 to Jen 2014-11-13 19:01 GMT+03:00 Alex Saroyan <alexsaroyan at gmail.com>: > +1 don't merge. > > Regards > /Alex Saroyan > > Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote: > > >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 > -- Alex Semenyaka -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ipv6-wg/attachments/20141113/5d3a1335/attachment.html>
- 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 ]