[gmuslera]

There are 2 sides of the problem. Consumers and services. Adding ipv6 from the side of services, that is something not so diverse, is easier than from the side of consumers (i.e. multiple ISPs, devices and so on).

If most if not all services are available also on IPv6, the demand for IPv4 may go down.

Services are the most forced side for using IPv4. Consumers can be behind some sort of NAT, so you can have a lot of users behind single IP addresses. But the destination, if it must be IPv4, is not so trivial.

That is the low hanging fruit of IPv6 adoption, having for all interesting services IPv6. Then ISPs will be free to do at their own rhythm their migration to v6 only. If interesting services start to be only for v6 (because they decided that public adoption was high enough, at least for their main target markets) ISPs will start to add ipv6 to their users, or provide some of the transition mechanisms like NAT46 if that is too complex/expensive because local infrastructure.

But still a lot of very used services are IPv4 only (https://whynoipv6.com/ have a recent enough list ), or worse, have faulty IPv6 implemented (i.e. AAAA records but nothing listening there or with routing problems)