If there is a need for more groups, we can create new ones.
with all due respect, jari; maybe the number of groups is neither the problem nor the solution too much energy has been and is still being wasted dealing with overly cute/complex ideas these wgs invent to fancy up ipv6 so it will be deployed; from tla/nla/... to ula to sham6. this has prevented focusing on the real problems of deployment so they can be solved. and the unscalable tunneling schemes are making a mess, in architecture, in implementation, in user experience. the latter is causing folk to turn off ipv6. there is a problem that the ivtf is dominated by the very vendors who are holding up deployment by incomplete, poorly performing, expensive to scale products. and adding complexity and features is not helping this either. randy