> The key problem has been in the delayed roll out of IPv6 to end customers, or for xDSL modems to be able to support IPv6 (most of which only support IPv4). T

> The key problem has been in the delayed roll out of IPv6 to end customers, or for xDSL modems to be able to support IPv6 (most of which only support IPv4). The real key problem has always been that there's almost nothing to do in IPv6 space. I've got IPv6 connectivity (via 6to4 and HE tunnel broker) for more than two years. All I remember is watching that dancing turtle, visiting Google search over IPv6 (once or twice, maybe, because typing "ipv6.google.com" is inconvenient and pointless), read Python docs and updated various GNU/Linux distros from IPv6-capable mirrors. Oh, the only really useful thing is the ability to directly ssh/scp into any computer at my home without constructing additional tunnels to overcome limitation of having a single globally-routable IPv4 address per 6 devices. It's not like most ISPs can provide IPv6 support easily, but even those who can see no point in doing so. NAT64+DNS64 is resourcewise worse than classic IPv4 NAT. Some (lots?) of clients will experience all sorts of strange client-side bugs with IPv6-only connectivity. And, more important, there're almost nothing to do in IPv6 Internet today. I believe when hosting providers will start giving IPv6 blocks to every and each customer, ISPs will follow. Not the other way.