The organisations that have not yet bothered to look at IPv6 are probably not complaining about the IPv4 address space. They are quite happy as they are.
This is, however, a big problem for smaller ISPs and startup ISPs. And these ISPs are popular to a lot of SMEs who are fed up with the low level of support provided by the large ISPs and like the close technical relationships that can be built. Absolutely, we all should be pushing IPv6, and actively encouraging and helping our customers, but the lack of take up and interest has got us in the situation where we do also still need to free up more IPv4 until IPv6 becomes more widely adopted. The example of Universities with a /16 that have not implemented IPv6 because they have not needed to is just one example of the scale of the problem. On Thu, 7 May 2020 at 10:45, Tim Chown <tim.ch...@jisc.ac.uk> wrote: > > On 6 May 2020, at 17:39, Nick Hilliard <n...@foobar.org> wrote: > > > > Tim Chown wrote on 06/05/2020 16:29: > >> Organisations have had 20 years to form a plan to adopt and deploy > IPv6. It’s not rocket science. > > > > it's more to do with motivation than whether it's rocket science. > Installing stable ipv4 connectivity was troublesome enough when it started, > but the motivation was high. IPv6 is an evolution of this with a level of > gain that, regrettably, does not interest many people. > > Well, let’s rephrase it. Organisations have had many years to form a > considered plan; that may mean they choose to move progressively to adopt > IPv6 (witness Sky, EE, Mythic, BT, Facebook, Akamai, Cloudflare, etc) or > they have a plan that, for whatever reason, sidelines IPv6 for the time > being. But having made those considerations, to complain that there is > suddenly no IPv4 address space available, well… > > Tim -- Paul Bone Network Consultant PMB Technology
