On 09.11.14, 17.06, Lu wrote:
Should we put address policy wh together with IPv6 wg? Why we need two different wg for addressing?the day we start treat IPv6 as normal IP address is the day we really in a world of v6.
You may want to have a look at the charter for the two working-groups, they were as I remember carefully crafted some years back - to make sure there is no overlap.

As Address-policy is normally two time-slots and Ipv6 1-2 timeslots a combined working-group would be pretty large.

One reason to treat Ipv6 different than Ip4 is that the RIPE community still need to focus on promoting an d deployment of Ipv6 . a challenge we do not have with Ipv4:-)

But this is of-course up to the Workinggroups...


http://www.ripe.net/ripe/groups/wg/ipv6

IPv6 is the next generation Internet Protocol. The IPv6 working group exists to promote IPv6 adoption.

The working group activities may be anything useful in helping people to deploy IPv6, and to manage IPv4/IPv6 co-existence. These activities include:

The working group will cooperate with operators and others, both inside and outside the networking industry, to share resources and combine efforts.

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/groups/wg/ap

The Address Policy Working Group develops policies relating to the management and registration of Internet addresses and routing identifiers (currently IPv4, IPv6 and ASN) by the RIPE NCC and the LIRs within the RIPE NCC Service Region.

Anyone with an interest in Internet numbering issues is welcome to observe participate and contribute to the working group.

-- 
Hans Petter Holen
Mobile +47 45 06 60 54 | hph@oslo.net | http://hph.oslo.net