Re: IP4 Space - the lie

[Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi>]

On (2010-03-06 10:07 -0800), Cameron Byrne wrote:
 
> Folks are risking their business and their customers if they don't
> have an IPv6 plan, and when i say IPv6 plan i mean IPv6-only.  This
> list has already examined how polluted the remaining free IPv4 blocks
> are ... and as others have pointed out, CGN will be an expensive and
> poor QoE reality for those clinging to IPv4

I'm personally afraid that EU+US companies may not see the risk. Majority
of people in EU+US who want broadband and have purchase power for the
services, should already have connectivity, as broadband penetration is
somewhat complete.

Companies offering products/services may view that implementing IPv6 will
not bring them new business, but implementing it carries non-zero cost. And
providing access to consumers who are not potential customers increases
costs without increasing revenue.

The major losers in EU+US market seem to be start-ups, who can't get
addresses and thus have fraction of the market size giving existing
companies unfair competitive advantage, nearly impossible to overcome.

I would personally hope that EU+US would mandate that residential ISP add
IPv6 to their subscribers by default, without possibility to opt-out in
n years time. Hopefully n would be no more than 3.

APAC and Africa surely are completely different matter.
-- 
  ++ytti