On 1/24/15 11:11 AM, Peter Lambrechtsen wrote:
My personal view is I personally doubt there will be
much movement for
the next 5+ years or even more unless the "killer v6" app comes out or
something major happens like Facebook only supporting v6 from a certain
date. There are fairly simple reasons why.
I find that a depressing view. There's no reason for most ISPs why IPv6
should not be delivered on broadband today, especially from new market
Most ISPs have plenty of spare address space and the
broadband market is pretty static.
Even the new players like bigpipe and myrepublic have managed to get v4
address space. And those two didn't launch with a dual stack. Why was
It's been shown that even the new players can survive with CGNat in the
days of Section 92 without needing to log everything I presume.
In the mobile space I can see it happening. But at the same time CGNat
seems to be working for them too.
CGN will not save you, and will add significant capital and operational
cost to any ISP, regardless of technology chosen.
IPv6 has an up-front cost to complete the engineering to support it; CGN
has costs forever. I do not think that is a wise long term investment -
and as Brian pointed out, the world's largest operators seem to have
agreed with that view.
I have native IPv6 (dual stack) on my wireline connection in my US home;
native IPv6 on my US LTE cellular device (dual stack w/ NAT IPv4). Many
operators worldwide have completed the implementation, and IPv6 traffic
is trending upward.