> break. It seems like an IPv6-only ISP would need to operate the NAT-PT > boxes, and dedicate a block of v4 addresses the size of the expected > concurrent online users to the NAT-PT box. Keep in mind that a v6 ISP > with 1 million customers won't need a million v4 addresses, for obvious > reasons. It's going to be considerably less than if each customer got a > v4 address. NAT-PT does seem like a viable short term solution. I'm
An IPv6-only ISP with enough IPv4 addresses for its concurrent online users seems strange. Why wouldn't that ISP give those v4 addresses to the online users instead of the NAT-PT box? And why do you call it IPv6-only? Andras