> On Sep 23, 2021, at 12:50 , Brian Johnson <brian.john...@netgeek.us> wrote:
>
> Side question on this thread…
>
> Is it everyones current expectation that if a provider were to switch to IPv6
> and drop IPv4 that the customers would all be just fine with that? I believe
> that there are several applications used by some of the the loudest customers
> (typically gamers and network gurus), not to mention some business
> applications that would break or be sub-optimal at best. I see CGN as the
> band aid to this issue, not the cure to the problem.
Today? no.
At some point when a relatively small number of remaining laggards among major
content providers move forward? Yes.
Do you really think that those applications/vendors wouldn’t move quickly if a
couple of major eyeball providers announced “Effective X date”, we’re going to
start offering a $X/month discount to any customer(s) who are willing to stop
using IPv4.
You an only cover an arterial bleed with a band-aid for so long before it
becomes silly, septic even. If you’re wondering how quick that point is coming
up, I suggest you check your mirrors.
Owen
>
> Discuss…?
>
> - Brian
>
>> On Sep 23, 2021, at 10:46 AM, Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
>>
>>> There are real issues with dual-stack, as this thread started out with.
>>> I don't think there is a need neither to invent IPv6 problems, nor to
>>> promote IPv6 advantages. What we need is a way out of dual-stack-hell.
>>
>> I don’t disagree, but a reversion to IPv4-only certainly won’t do it.
>>
>> I think the only way out is through. Unfortunately, the IPv6 resistant forces
>> are making that hard for everyone else.
>>
>> Owen
>>
>
