On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 06:46:52 +1100, Mark Andrews said: > > On 26 Nov 2019, at 03:53, Dmitry Sherman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >  I believe itâs Eyeball networkâs matter to free IPv4 blocks and > > move to v6.
> It requires both sides to move to IPv6. Why should the cost of maintaining > working networks be borne alone by the eyeball networks? That is what is > mostly happening today with CGN. I believe that Dmitry's point is that we will still require IPv4 addresses for new organizations deploying dual-stack, and eyeball networks can more easily move a /16 or even bigger to mostly IPv6 and a small CGNAT address space than content providers can free up IPv4 addresses during the time that dual stack is still needed.
pgpJWJYbH090t.pgp
Description: PGP signature
