It appears that Randall Gellens <rg+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: >If an organizations wants some IPv4 addresses but can't get any, >wouldn't that be an incentive for that organization to deploy IPv6? Since they probably want them to talk to other IPv4 systems, no. I think IPv6 is swell, and I am trying to get my local ISP to support it so I don't have to use a tunnel from my router, but I understand why they don't. Even though the free pool of IPv4 space is gone, there is plenty for sale, a dismaying amount of old swamp space being squatted or hijacked, and even more leased to people who chew through chunks, abusing it until it's blacklisted. About 30 /8's of allocated space is not advertised so there is likely to be plenty more for sale at the right price. It's not hard to make a case to use IPv6 rather than 10/8 or unadvertised IPv4 space for your internal use. ULAs give you vast amount of space for free and (if you actually use a random prefix) little chance of collision if networks later have to merge. Or get public IPv6 space which is not very hard. Plenty of mobile networks are entirely v6 internally with CGN gateways, which is fine if you're building your network from scratch and have a lot of control over the devices that attach to it. But anyone who imagines that the public Internet will stop running on IPv4 anytime soon, is nuts. R's, John
