"Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

Thu Nov 29 05:27:41 UTC 2012

On Nov 28, 2012, at 4:17 PM, "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobbins at arbor.net> wrote:

> 
> On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:04 AM, Tony Hain wrote:
> 
>> Getting the cpe vendors to ship in quantity requires the ISP engineering organizations to say in unison "we are deploying IPv6 and will only recommend products that pass testing".
> 
> Do you see any evidence of that occurring?  I don't.
> 
Yes.

Comcast, Cable Labs, Time Warner are doing pretty well at this now. Others there is room for improvement, but it's definitely better than a year ago.

> Also, a lot of broadband consumers and enterprise organizations buy and deploy their own CPE.  Do you see a lot of IPv6 activity there?  I don't, excepting an IPv6 RFP checkbox for enterprises, which doesn't have any formal requirements and is essentially meaningless because of that fact.

Very little, but, most of those buy based on the "supported device" list from their carrier, so…

> 
>> You claim to be looking for the economic incentive, but are looking with such a short time horizon that all you see are the 'waste' products vendors
>> are pushing to make a quick sale, knowing that you will eventually come back for yet-another-hack to delay transition, and prop up your expertise in a
>> legacy technology.
> 
> No.
> 
> What I am looking for is an economic incentive which will justify the [IMHO] wildly overoptimisitic claims which some are making in re ubiquitous end-to-end native IPv6 deployment.
> 
> Otherwise, I believe it will be a much more gradual adoption curve, as you indicate.
> 

The inability to add customers to IPv4 will become a factor in this. 60% of the world's population still isn't on the internet and I expect a significant fraction of that will be coming on in the next 2-4 years.

Owen