[ipv6-wg] Disband IPv6 WG

Hi,


On Thu, 3 Oct 2019, Jens Link wrote:

> Uros Gaber <uros at ub330.net> writes:
>
>> 1. WHY should it have NAT
>
> NATs are good. They provide security.

No, they provide "Translation". Not the same thing.


>> 2. What do you understand under class, IPv4 "Classes" are just defined
>> subnet groups (simply put)
>
> Things need names. Numbers are hard to remember. We have Class-A for /8,
> Class-B for /16 and Class-C for /24. We need names for the others as
> well.

CIDR.
People that thought that terminology to students over the years really 
fumbled...



>> 3. AFAIK DHCPv6 is defined in RFC (3319,3646,4704,5007,6221,6355,6939,8415)
>
> But it's DHCPv6. Not DHCP! It works differently. And Android does not
> support it. Enterprise Customers want DHCP!

Is it unfixable...?



>> 6. Dots and colon, what's the difference?
>
> I have do change my regex.

The world is all about changes :-)



>> 7. Use DNS to resolve - no [] needed then.
>
> DNS is to hard, to complex and fails to often.

No, it's really the most robust planetary system. It can suffer attacks 
(it did, it does) but is still pretty much does the job.



> And in enterprise
> networks it probably done by another team.

So? Teams inside the same organisation are supposed to speak :-)


Cheers,
Carlos