> […] I think the far more common view is rather that v4 is fine and its only problem is solved by NAT. The only reason why NAT is "solving" the problem is bec

> […] I think the far more common view is rather that v4 is fine and its only problem is solved by NAT. The only reason why NAT is "solving" the problem is because IPv6 is taking some of the pressure off. T-Mobile US has 120M subscribers: * https://www.statista.com/statistics/219577/total-customers-of-t-mobile-usa-by-quarter/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/219577/total-customers-o... And they went to IPv6-only: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGbxCKAqNUE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGbxCKAqNUE There's no way that would work in a no-IPv6 / IPv4-only world. Comcast ran out of 10/8 address space to manage their cable modems: how would that work without IPv6? Google says India is 74% IPv6: * https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-country-ipv6-adoption https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-... How would that work with only IPv4? Even on smaller scales, without IPv6, supporting IPv4 with CG-NAT can get really expensive, real fast: > We learned a very expensive lesson. 71% of the IPv4 traffic we were supporting was from ROKU devices. 9% coming from DishNetwork & DirectTV satellite tuners, 11% from HomeSecurity cameras and systems, and remaining 9% we replaced extremely outdated Point of Sale(POS) equipment. So we cut ROKU some slack three years ago by spending a little over $300k just to support their devices. * https://community.roku.com/t5/Features-settings-updates/It-s-2022-and-still-no-IPv6/m-p/854673/highlight/true#M35732 https://community.roku.com/t5/Features-settings-updates/It-s... * Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35047624 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35047624