Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

[Brian Johnson <brian.johnson () netgeek us>]

> On Sep 11, 2021, at 9:04 PM, Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf () gmail com> wrote:
>
>
> Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways...
>
> > On Sep 8, 2021, at 1:31 AM, Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi> wrote:
> >
> > If the mid size eyeballs knew ipv4 is going away in 10, 15, 20 years
> > whichever it is, then they'd of course have to start moving too,
> > because no upstream.
>
> And they would fight it tooth and nail, just like they do now, and if they found an address they could NAT to, they 
> would argue that that one address gave them the ability to avoid the transition -just like they do now.

Speaking for the smaller providers, there is enough of the Internet that is only accessible via IPv4 out there that CGN 
solutions are a reasonable way to manage the situation. There is also enough legacy equipment out there that doesn’t 
accommodate IPv6 that this process will still take several decades.

Edicts never work. More carrot, less stick.