[XelNika]

CGNAT is standard for all smaller ISPs in Denmark. I'm not sure if it's mainly to stay competitive or due to limited supply, but they offer public IPv4 addresses upon request, sometimes for free. It makes sense really; if you default to CGNAT, which is fine for 99% of users, there will be more public addresses for the people who need them which keeps costs down for both segments. It's not the ISP's fault the standard is outdated.

[BlueTemplar]

I take issue that it's "fine for 99% of users" or that it's not a big deal :

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25744675

[XelNika]

That is not a realistic scenario. Firstly, there's no waking up to find your server is unresponsive. It's part of the deal when you sign up. Secondly, public IPs are always an option. Thirdly, the ISPs I have used have always had relevant FAQ/help articles.

If any of those points do not apply to your ISP, that's not because of CGNAT, it's just a shit company. I've used four different ISPs in the past four years and getting rid of CGNAT has not been a problem once. IIRC only one of them used public addresses by default, two offered free dynamic IPs upon request and my current ISP offers paid static IPs for $3.

Tons of my friends and family have had CGNAT and never known. It's just not a big deal for most content consumers.