Re: [v6ops] Why enterprises aren't adopting IPv6 (Re: Implementation Status of PREF64)

[Owen DeLong <[e-mail]>]

> What is the main problem IPv6 was designed to solve?
> 
> Lack of IPv4 addresses.

Correct.

> What problem don't many enterprises have since they're using RFC1918s, and could misuse 100.64/10 if they really need to get more.
> 
> Most enterprises don't have the main problem that IPv6 is designed to solve.

Not entirely true… More accurately, many enterprises are able to pretend they don’t have this problem today because of the above.

However, eyeball providers DO have this problem and its getting worse. Further, eyeball providers are on some of the thinnest margins
and consumer IP access is at the low end of the market, so paying for more and more IPv4 addresses and more and more expensive
(and more complex) IPv4 solutions and higher support costs for those IPv4 solutions becomes a non-starter at some point.

Either consumer access in general will become significantly more expensive, or eyeball providers will start having to find a way to
surcharge IPv4 services (whether that’s in the form of an IPv4 surcharge or an overall price increase with an IPv6-only discount
or whatever).

I already know enterprises that are experiencing pain because their outsourced contractors in certain parts of the world are basically
IPv6-only already and the fact that their contractors can’t interact with the corporate network via IPv6 is causing issues.

> For IPv6 to be adopted by many enterprises, there will need to be other reasons that are of business value.

Employee/contractor connectivity is of vale to most enterprises. There’s a time coming when that’s going to require IPv6 support.

Owen