> On Mar 24, 2022, at 15:16 , Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 3/24/22 3:13 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>
>>> On Mar 24, 2022, at 14:46 , Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/24/22 1:59 PM, Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote:
>>>> Home users aren’t the long tail here. Enterprise is the long tail here.
>>>> Android phones are,
>>>> indeed, part of the enterprise problem, but not the biggest part.
>>>>
>>>> If this were a purely technical problem, we’d have been done more than a
>>>> decade ago. The
>>>> problem is a lack of corporate “round tuits” which for each enterprise are
>>>> in limited supply and
>>>> usually go to things that either reduce costs or increase revenue.
>>>>
>>> So long as they have public facing v6 servers is there really a problem?
>>> Sure you're not going to get to 100% deployment, but nothing is going to do
>>> that in any of our lifetimes. The object should be to not have to deploy
>>> tortured hacks like CGNAT. That is what success is IMO, and we don't from a
>>> technical standpoint.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>> Yes… We need them to have v6 deployed to their clients so that content
>> providers can start turning off v4 where it’s costing them money to support
>> it.
>
> Well content providers could pretty easily force the issue if they wanted.
>
> MIke
Not really… Content providers turning off v4 face competition from content
providers that don’t.
Doing so en masse would require a kind of coordination that’s prohibited by the
Sherman act.
Owen
