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 <jmaimon () jmaimon com>]

Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote:
> I believe that talking about removing IPv4 in any capacity /now/ is a 
> disservice to the larger conversation.
We mostly agree. Except that there is a significant vocal portion of the 
IPv6 spectrum that would like to start obsoleting IPv4 now.

> I have my doubts about getting back to a single protocol Internet 
> (IPv6) in my lifetime, much less my career.
I both doubt and very much hope that it will not be quite that long, but 
even so, the fact that it can even be considered a possibility should be 
a significant wake up call.

In any event, all this underscores the reality that IPv4 requires more 
investment to carry along until that point.

> > And until that point, IPv6 is an optimization, not a requirement.
>
> How long do you wait during the "optimization" window before actually 
> deploying IPv6?  The 11th hour?  Why not start deploying IPv6 with new 
> green field deployments at the 2nd hour?
Until you have the itch to do so, until you have a business case to do 
so, until you no longer have any excuse not to do so. The opt in 
optimization is optional.

Joe