| Yes, in my reply to tgflynn in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8272923 there's an attempt to argue about the numbers. Also, another factor which will kick in as more and more folks get IPv6 is that maintaining both IPv4 and IPv6 is a bit of a pain. Considering that you can pack the entire IPv4 internet into a single /96 IPv6 prefix (that's 4 billion times less than the address space available for a single subnet), getting your infra IPv6-only and frontending it with a stateless IPv4->IPv6 translator (or an SLB64 boxes) becomes a more and more interesting option. More info on this: https://ripe64.ripe.net/presentations/67-20120417-RIPE64-The... Another company which might be more familiar, moving in a similar direction: http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/resources/case-stud... This is the content side. On the eyeball side, there are also wins to be made by simplifying the infrastructure by running IPv6-only, and running IPv4 atop that as a service. See https://ripe67.ripe.net/presentations/131-ripe2-2.pdf for a good and public example of this being done. These are the leaders, but they give the impression of what can and will be done by more and more folks. Thus, it makes sense to start talking about when the IPv4 will be turned off. Some anecdata:
http://www.networkworld.com/article/2168165/tech-primershen-... And a couple more links with an economic/game theory angle on turning off IPv4: https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/wed.general.howard... www.asgard.org/images/pricing_v1.3.docx So, indeed quite an interesting time ahead! (Sorry for offtopic, BTW, given the thread was about the NDN :-) |