I quite like the idea of being able to give every device behind a CPE a globally routable address. If there is a way to avoid NAT in the first place (also 1918 if that's how you're forced to do CPE management), v6 seems like an obvious alternative. Unless I'm mistaken that the RIR would happily allocate enough addresses for a /29 per household?
The content is what drives the business decisions, so if the problem of accessing V4 content were magic-ed away, I'm not seeing why the bashing on V6. Should I come to more nznogs for the answer?
/Chris
----- Original Message ----
From: Alastair Johnson
I don't know how more obvious it can be made.
It's solving the looming problem of the IPv4 address pool being exhausted in the next 3 to 6 years.
Is not complete lack of Internet connectivity for new customers not a good enough reason?
I think the subject line says it all, on that particular topic. V6 seems to largely be a problem looking for a solution at this point in time. Need to support 25 million CPE devices? There are ways to do that, and many vendors are falling over themselves to help you. STBs? No problem. Triple/quad/quinta-plays? Got it covered. While I don't doubt that IPv6 will eventually become the widespread protocol, do you REALLY see that happening before 2020-ish? At which point the carriers will be able to make a premium selling v4 service, because by gosh there will be a lot of legacy networks out there needing it. But that's a completely separate topic. aj. _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog