nanog mailing list archives
Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block
From: Giorgio Bonfiglio via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2024 00:40:11 -0800
2) Assume that Google decided that they would no longer support IPv4 for any of their services at a specific date a couple of years in the future. […] I really expect something like this to be the next part of the end game for IPv4.
It’s never gonna happen … why would Google, or any other internet property, launch something which artificially cuts the potential revenue pool to IPv6-ready customers? I’m with you it would be amazing and a strong driver, but it’s just not in the realm of possibility…
Current thread:
- 202401101433.AYC Re: EzIP Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block, (continued)
- 202401101433.AYC Re: EzIP Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block Abraham Y. Chen (Jan 10)
- Re: 202401101433.AYC Re: EzIP Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block Forrest Christian (List Account) (Jan 10)
- Streamline the CG-NAT Re: 202401101433.AYC Re: EzIP Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block Abraham Y. Chen (Jan 11)
- Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: 202401101433.AYC Re: EzIP Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block Christopher Hawker (Jan 11)
- Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: 202401101433.AYC Re: EzIP Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block Abraham Y. Chen (Jan 12)
- Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: 202401101433.AYC Re: EzIP Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block Christopher Hawker (Jan 12)
- Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: 202401101433.AYC Re: EzIP Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block Abraham Y. Chen (Jan 13)
- Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: 202401101433.AYC Re: EzIP Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block Forrest Christian (List Account) (Jan 11)
- One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block Abraham Y. Chen (Jan 12)
- Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block Forrest Christian (List Account) (Jan 13)
- Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block Giorgio Bonfiglio via NANOG (Jan 13)
- Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block Forrest Christian (List Account) (Jan 13)
- Re: IPv6 Adoption Incentives Giorgio Bonfiglio via NANOG (Jan 13)
- Re: IPv6 Adoption Incentives Dave Taht (Jan 13)
- Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block Brandon Butterworth (Jan 13)
- Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block Brett O'Hara (Jan 13)
- Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block Forrest Christian (List Account) (Jan 13)
- Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block Abraham Y. Chen (Jan 15)
- Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block Christopher Hawker (Jan 15)
- Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block Forrest Christian (List Account) (Jan 15)
- Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block Abraham Y. Chen (Jan 18)