nanog mailing list archives
Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock))
From: Daniel Karrenberg <dfk () ripe net>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2022 09:07:34 +0100
On 14-03-2022 05:06, Fred Baker wrote:
... Where IPv6 has a problem today is with enterprise. IMHO, this is basically because enterprise is looking at the bottom line. If ISPs were to do what Mythic Beasts says they do, which is charge their users for address space, IPv6 is virtually free while IPv4 costs something. I suspect that enterprise would change its tune dramatically. ...
This has already started to happen. For example my preferred hosting provider recently made the IPv4 address a line item on their invoices. The total price did not change. Customers can now save money by electing not to use IPv4. This makes sense for both the supplier and the customer and it will happen more and more. The cost of clinging to IPv4 will rise and it will become more visible.
Daniel
Current thread:
- Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock)), (continued)
- Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock)) Ca By (Mar 11)
- Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock)) Joe Maimon (Mar 11)
- Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock)) Grant Taylor via NANOG (Mar 11)
- Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock)) Joe Maimon (Mar 11)
- Re: V6 still widely supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, John Levine (Mar 11)
- Re: V6 still widely supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, David Conrad (Mar 11)
- Re: V6 still widely supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, John Covici (Mar 11)
- Re: V6 still widely supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, Josh Luthman (Mar 11)
- Re: V6 still widely supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, Christopher Morrow (Mar 13)
- Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock)) Joe Maimon (Mar 11)
- Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock)) Ca By (Mar 11)
- Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock)) Fred Baker (Mar 13)
- Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock)) Daniel Karrenberg (Mar 14)