* Job Snijders <job@ntt.net> [191008 05:29]:
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@oneiros.de) [191007 19:13]:
Am Mo., 7. Okt. 2019 um 18:04 Uhr schrieb Dave Taht <dave.taht@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
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?
I think both suggested measures (going 100% ipv6-only on the meeting network and on this mailing list) are a pretty bad idea. It might be useful if we want to congratulate ourselfes how cool we are and how good we can work in an IPv6-only environment, but it would have no use whatsoever to help the RIPE community and the internet at large to migrate towards a world where IPv6 is the "normal" protocol. On the other hand, switching the "default" meeting SSID to IPv6-only/NAT64 while still providing the dual stack network as a fallback, preferably combined with a helpdesk staffed by volunteers ready to analyze any problems that attendees might have, strikes me as a pretty good opportunity to raise awareness and to find problems where further work is needed. Wolfgang have,