> I view the v6 transition like the how to get rid of IE6 transition. This seems like a fairly good comparison. Just like with IE, we're stuck in a catch-22 until something blows IPv4 out of the water. There's no incentive for making consumer devices support IPv6 until ISPs stop supporting v4, and that's very unlikely to happen unless there are IPv6-only networks that the devices won't work on. The fundamental problem is that there's no business case on either end, which means it all comes down to risk. Why should either bother to add new functionality when as far as they're concerned nothing is broken and there's no profit to be made from upgrading.
Unfortunately the same applies to the majority of consumers, who realistically don't care how their internet works as long as they can access Facebook/Candy Crush/<other social media>. Which ultimately means at the moment there's nobody to pressure any party into making the upgrade. Whilst Paul's suggestion may not be ideal, it feels more likely to succeed than the "sit and wait" of the past 24 years. Regards, Jacob Mansfield www.jacobmansfield.co.uk
