24 karma · joined August 26, 2011
I still am.
As IPv4 becomes more scarce, two economic forces trigger
1) They become more valuable (read more desired). IPv4 has all the network effects going for it. It's where 99.9% of the Internet already is. .1% being IPv6 only devices.
2) To counter the rising value/cost: Workaround/Kludges/Alternatives to every devices needing a globally unique address are tried. Everyone is going to reply with how awful NAT is, and I concede it has its flaws. However, it is hard to deny its success so far. Business then do the cost benefit of the shortcomings of things like NAT vs selling their now valuable IPv4 address space, think where they are going to come down?
edit fixed grammar
Let's start admitting that IPv6 offers no (or little) present day net benefits compared to the benefit of currently connecting to all of IPv4. And let's stop with the NAT booggy man argument. NAT works well, as much as any tech works and isn't perfect. And let's stop pretending that only thing stopping a peer 2 peer utopia is the lack of globally unique address. There many economic forces in play beyond that.
(edit spelling fix)
What advantage is IPv6 for most of my devices giving me?
I have 1 public IP address and everything works.
We have an an IPv4 allocation problem, TONS of IPv4 space allocated to companies and not used. What we don't have is IPv4 usage problem, or the need for everything "on the internet" to be publicly addressable.