3 ms·
Because lack of demand and because v4 NAT still works. Other reasons may vary from company to company. Sometimes, because first experiments with v6 were failur
by drdaeman 10y ago
Because lack of demand and because v4 NAT still works.
Other reasons may vary from company to company. Sometimes, because first experiments with v6 were failures (users reported connectivity issues - remote systems weren't working well, but it's ISP who gets the blame). And sometimes because proper v6 deployment takes a significant effort even if a company's lucky that the existing software was written with some v6 support in mind.
Most users don't even know what "IP address" actually is (they know the words and, in best case, that it's some numbers), not that it has "versions" or anything.
I believe mobile carriers need v6, as they have way too many always-connected devices on the network. Cable companies have more breathing space in this regard.
Source: used to work in a small(er) FTTH ISP company, and still keep in touch with them on some occasions.
- shmerl 10y ago> Because lack of demand and because v4 NAT still works. In a sense it's catch 22. To increase demand, ISPs should support IPv6. Otherwise everyone is forced to support IPv4 for their sites and services, and why would users demand ISPs to support IPv6 if sites and services work anyway?... The problem is, NAT doesn't work. I.e. it kind of works, but it's a huge pain and cost to support for anyone who has to deal with it (from development standpoint). In essence, it's a monstrosity which only magnifies the problem by delaying the global switch. So essentially in order to solve this, everyone should be putting an effort into enabling IPv6, and if someone waits for others to demand it, they are harming the whole transition.