[ipv6-wg] Have we failed as IPv6 Working Group?
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Have we failed as IPv6 Working Group?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Have we failed as IPv6 Working Group?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Job Snijders
job at ntt.net
Tue Oct 8 05:29:59 CEST 2019
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 08:11:41PM +0200, Enno Rey wrote: > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 08:05:18PM +0200, Bjoern Buerger wrote: > > * Martin Schr?der (martin at oneiros.de) [191007 19:13]: > > > Am Mo., 7. Okt. 2019 um 18:04 Uhr schrieb Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com>: > > > > If I can get *one* person in this working group to go down to > > > > their local coffee shop and make ipv6 work by whatever means > > > > necessary (and > > > > > > Please start by eating your own dog food and make future RIPE > > > meetings IPv6 only. > > > > +1 > > > > Bj?rn > > we should definitely have a discussion about this in the 'open mic' > slot in the wg in Rotterdam. Let's identify who to talk to, from the > meetings' NOC and other circles within RIPE NCC, beforehand. If folks are serious about killing dual-stack ... Wouldn't it make more sense to first move this mailing list to an actual ipv6-only environment? Perhaps the WG could RIPE NCC to register a domain like ripe-ipv6-only-wg.org. This domain would have authoritative nameservers only reachable via IPv6, an MTA that doesn't have any IPv4 connectivity & a webserver with the charter, CoC, and mailing list archive only accessible via IPv6. Much like how Marco David's dnslabs.nl is set up? Kind regards, Job
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Have we failed as IPv6 Working Group?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Have we failed as IPv6 Working Group?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]