<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">The main thing holding “large” providers back from rolling out IPv6 across the board is cost … you’ll have to increase the effective costs of IPv4 to $100 per IP before you’ll be at a point where the cost savings of switching to IPv6 outweigh the costs of depreciating the current IPv4 capable kit and going through natural expansion / upgrades to kit capable of IPv6<div><br></div><div>Vendors have been slow to produce kit which is IPv6 capable .. they’re starting to do this, but on the whole the big players have been holding off on the $xx million capex spend until the kit they have in place has depreciated sufficiently.</div><div><br></div><div>Some of the bigger players here in the UK were almost at the point of rolling out kit which is v6 capable when they found that this kit also did CGNAT and rolling out CGN is easier / cheaper than rolling IPv6 “in the short term”</div><div><br></div><div>Then you have to factor in CPE … from Broadband (and VoIP) perspective not all kit does IPv6 yet</div><div><br></div><div>Rather than forcing an exponential cost increase in v4 address space, work to roll out IPv6 now and get a _competitive advantage_ against the big boys - then make hay while their accountants tell them they can’t spend money on the v6 kit.</div><div><br></div><div>When they finally do we might find their land grab pricing has to disappear and they start to cover the costs of the new infrastructure they’ve had to roll out ….</div><div><br></div><div>All you’ll do by increasing the costs of IPv4 is make the smaller guys less competitive and drive a few more out of business whilst the big boys go “oh well another 20c per user on our cost base, c’est la vie</div><div><br></div><div>IPv4 is dead. IPv6 is the future. Roll out IPv6 .. push the vendors to provide IPv6 compatible kit … harder I know when the big boys aren’t pushing .. but push never the less .. if enough of us small guys push hard enough then we stand a chance of getting somewhere and maybe getting a competitive advantage over the behemoth again .. for a short while</div><div><br></div><div>Jon</div><div><br></div><div><div><div>On 18 Dec 2013, at 15:17, Vlad Dascalu <<a href="mailto:vladd@beetux.com">vladd@beetux.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><div><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">>> IP Market = resource < demand (charging won’t help)</span><br>That's simply not true, it's economy 101 basic stuff: demand adjusts based on price. If the price is higher, the demand will fall until it's equal to demand.<br><br>Consider the case of large telecom that have an unique IP for every telephone line. A higher price is the only motivation that will encourage them to switch their private VOIP network to IPv6. At that higher price-point their transition will be feasible for them, why still being easily affordable by businesses which need a IPv4 for their website or other critical resources.<br><br>Resource depletion shouldn't prevent an efficient allocation of scarcity.<br></div>Vlad<br></div><div class="gmail_extra" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>