

We're sorry. The IPv4 address you are trying to reach has been disconnected. - lmacvittie
http://devcentral.f5.com/weblogs/macvittie/archive/2009/04/27/wersquore-sorry.-the-ipv4-address-you-are-trying-to-reach.aspx

======
Tagith
Arguably, there's an element of discrimination here too. Large American and
European corporations and governments have plenty of IP addresses. (For a
start, have a look at:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IP_address_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IP_address_blocks)
) Whereas countries like India and China are lacking IP addresses. Until the
address shortage starts to affect the aforementioned governments and
corporations, I doubt we'll see any significant movement.

------
kogir
It's the chicken and the egg problem. Right now I can't name a single US
consumer ISP using IPv6. If I update my edge routers, all my firewalls, dns,
and all my servers to support IPv6, what have I gained? No users will use it
to access my site, and now I'll have to use unmemorably long addresses in all
my equipment. No thank you..

Right now, for me and many others, IPv4 addresses running out is someone
else's problem. It doesn't affect me, so I feel no need to switch until I'm
forced.

Am I missing something? Is there some cool new feature of IPv6 that's worth
upgrading for?

------
amalcon
I can't source this, so disbelieve it if you like, but Comcast and others are
seriously looking at IPv6. The reason is basically that they know what a pain
it is going to be to switch. They want to get a head start, because they know
that sometime they're going to ask for some new IPs, and actually be told
"No."

The trick is that v6 isn't useful unless both the clients, servers, and
networks are doing it. Comcast and others will need to push on Level 3 and
others. Fortunately, they're big enough that they can play the "I hope nobody
else does this before you; we might need to buy transit from them" card.

~~~
wmf
Alain Durand from Comcast has been participating a lot in the IETF v6ops
working group where the IPv6 transition is being argued about. If you want to
understand or influence the transition, that's the place to be.

------
kree10
The best explanation I've read as to why ipv6 adoption isn't happening is
here: <http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html> .

~~~
jvdh
Dan Bernstein mainly describes that it is currently very hard to switch over.
I would add to that that there is currently no reason whatsoever for an
existing user to switch. Running out of address space is not a problem for an
existing user.

Also there is no real "killer app" for IPV6. When they started with IPv6,
there was a vision that it would solve all the hard problems that we currently
have with networking: address space, multihoming, and mobility of both users
and applications. However, all the zealots in the IETF made sure that IPv6 is
as compatible to IPv4 as possible, thus it only solves the depletion of
addresses.

Also, there is no guarantee that the routing mess that we currently have with
BGP will magically go away when we switch over to IPv6. There are already
signs that that problem is only going to get worse.

------
akronim
Presumably a lot of money is going to be spent on the transition - any
startups working in this area?

------
DLWormwood
The problem with the IPv6 migration isn't technical, but social. IPv4 was the
version of the protocol that was active when the Internet "went pop", and as
such, many people (especially those who actually pay for the technology,
rather than actually use it directly) think it is good enough. It doesn't help
matters that workarounds and kludges like NAT are regarded nowadays as
_features_ instead of flaws.

