[address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI for HOSTING

Jim Reid wrote:

> I doubt address allocation policies are having an impact on IPv6
> deployment or uptake. IMO the drivers for that have still to emerge:
> like the lack of v4 space (or its price compared to v6) or the
> operational pain of even more NAT and ALGs.

For me and companies around us, there IS a a difference.
First is the cost (direct cost and cost of pain with abroad contracts)
for just playing with something. This cost will not be returned back,
and there is still the financial crisis.

Some of our existing hosting customers asked us for IPv6. And they say
be never deploy IPv6 just because of direct and indirect costs needs to
be payed to RIPE NCC. But wanted to do that before.

Users can demand IPv6 from their ISPs to access to some sites. But I
don't believe right now users can demand IPv6 visibility from any web site.

-- 
WBR,
Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO)