nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective)
From: nanog--- via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 11:35:30 +0200
Corporations are paperclip maximizers, not charities. Nothing will ever convince one to drop 0.1% of its users "for the good of the Internet". It may happen for different reasons: to avoid an extra cost, to avoid a regulatory burden, to screw over a certain other company (such as an ISP who doesn't provide v6 to users). On 20 June 2025 10:57:07 am GMT+02:00, Robert Kisteleki via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:
I think what we need is for some big tech companies to sign a contract with each other that they start dropping IPv4 at their network edge in 2035 or so. This would then signal the market that you're going to need to deploy IPv6 and that you can do IPv6 only, because IPv4 only networks will have to figure out translation in their edges. And I think they should be motivated to do this, to get rid of the requirement of purchasing IPv4 addresses. However they probably will always be able to sink that cost in their products, and the real companies suffering from access to IPv4 spaces are competitors who never start. So it might be a good anti-competitive strategy to keep the IPv4 dream alive.I'm reasonably sure that those big tech companies are (closely) tracking their numbers, and know pretty accurately how much traffic (direct correlation: revenue) they would lose if they switched to v6 only. Ideally with projections on how much that loss may be in 2030, 2035, ... (with lots of assumptions, sure). What would possibly make them decide to drop 5% or 1% or 0.5% or even 0.1% of their potential customers (and revenue) at that time "for the good of the internet"? Robert _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/KY3QHZYJJ3EUB7GPU6SYT2MVXPBGYAOV/
_______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/3UDYJK5P6ER6T55LYBHU25YIODT3L2VS/
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective), (continued)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Marco Davids (Private) via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Mark Andrews via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Forrest Christian (List Account) via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Michael Thomas via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) sronan--- via NANOG (Jun 19)
- RE: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Gary Sparkes via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Niels Bakker via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Aaron1 via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Saku Ytti via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Robert Kisteleki via NANOG (Jun 20)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) nanog--- via NANOG (Jun 20)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Forrest Christian (List Account) via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Crist Clark via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re[2]: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Adam Fathauer via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re: Re[2]: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Forrest Christian (List Account) via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) jordi.palet--- via NANOG (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Michael Thomas via NANOG (Jun 20)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Saku Ytti via NANOG (Jun 20)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Michael Thomas via NANOG (Jun 20)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Lucien Hoydic via NANOG (Jun 20)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Mike Crute via NANOG (Jun 21)
- Re: IPv6 native percentage (end user perspective) Mark Tinka via NANOG (Jun 21)
