Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 05:15:33PM +1100, Mark Andrews: > > Much > > of it has to be replaced with newer h/w for v6 support or support folks > > have to visit each site to perform upgrades (spendy). Many core devices > > still have partial or missing support. Some protocols still lack v6 > > support. Multihoming is looking rather ugly for small networks (like > > those with just 1 v4 /24, thus need less than a v6/48). usw. > > I saw the same excuses being handed out a decade ago. If you have > equipment that needs to be replace now it means you failed to plan. You may be over-estimating the margins on home internet access and under- estimating the cost to upgrade every household (whether the ISP provides the modem or [worse] the end-user). thats just one piece of the puzzle. > I've got 15 year old equipment running IPv6. I've got lots of IPv6 > equipment that has been end-of-lifed by the manufacturer. Windows > XP supported IPv6 and that was releases in 2001. I've been running > IPv6 at home for over a decade now. I was adding IPv6 to the > products we ship ~16 years ago now and it has basically remained > unchanged since then. > > If your consumer device does not support IPv6 don't blame the IETF. > Blame the manufacturer. You can not compare a PC where things can be reasonably done in s/w and that software is easily upgraded to a simple modem at an end-user location or to head-end h/w that has to do forwarding in ASICs to deliver the b/w expected. These may adapt more slowly and often do not at all, requiring replacement.