Well since Nathans gone and told everyone :)
If we all start tunnelling, there may be a bit more of the learning taking place that would be needed for said ISPs to roll out v6. Perhaps WLUG's metanet(2) could be utilised here? Thier v6 support is progressing it seems.
http://www.wlug.org.nz/MetaNet http://www.wlug.org.nz/MetaNetIPv6
However, the metanet requires a proprietary piece of software that AFAIK is better optimised for a emulating a single ethernet broadcast domain. (ie peer to peer, stuff like that) ie. it doesn't talk to your Cisco's, or your Junipers(3).
We have a daemon called Etud that simulates a broadcast ethernet using UDP. This basically means any machine can 'establish' a tunnel with another, without the need for a single tunnel endpoint like FreeNet. We run BGP over this ethernet so it's a virtual peering point, using unicast v4 to send packets between the two metanet boxes, which means v6 performance is (almost) as good as native v4.
However. with a number of geeks running on metanet, perhaps machines could be put at APE and WIX to translate between metanet and native. There are a few technical issues to sort out here but most of them are trivial. Perhaps these machines could also terminate GRE tunnels or
, so that companies/people that can't either get there natively, or don't have linux routers things, can.
We already have a GRE? tunnel from a cisco box to a well-connected box on metanet.
This kind of scenario would allow many of the geeks around to get onto v6, and get learning it in a 'read world' (4) environment whilst ISPs and so on talk about doing it. When they get around to it, there will already be a (small) userbase.
The best thing about it is that we don't have to endure the insane latency FreeNet6 brings. James Spooner