Then don't run dual stack. Run native IPv6 and NAT64/DNS64. Or in DO's case make IPv4 access optional for smaller droplets and charge $1/month extra for it. In reality things like DB servers or backend app servers don't need public IPv4 addresses, and this would speed up IPv6 adoption considerably.
Or you can run IPv6 only core-network, perform NAT64 on one side and NAT46 on the customer side. There is an implementation for this on android [1], which is trivial to run on Linux (I've ported it, there's nothing difficult as it doesn't use anything android specific.) By the way, this technique is called XLAT464. There has been a nice presentation about it at the IETF, and you find the slides online[2]. I believe T-Mobile USA is currently deploying this on production level and it works quite well.
I think it's very close to dual-stack, and this technique has the advantage of being extremely easy to deploy. Especially if you already have NAT64 gateways setup in your network, then you have done more that half of the work :-).
Customer applications which require IPv4 and haven't been upgraded to support IPv6 still need a v4 address, and customers probably have to support their own clients that only use v4. You still have to ship the customer both L3 protocols. So the carrier would at least need to ship a NAT'd v4 address; v6-only would basically frustrate/anger/alienate a whole lot of customers, which is dumb from a making-money-with-my-company perspective.
In reality you can't just decide for your customers that they do or don't need something - you have to ask them what they need (if you want to continue having customers). Nobody's going to re-engineer all their shit to support your wonky network if they can just go to another company that provides them what they need.
No. You provide the best service to your customers for the best price. For DO's case, default to IPv6 and charge extra for each IPv4 address used. Currently, they charge $5/month for their cheapest droplet. Change that to $4/month and charge an extra $1/month for an IPv4 address. This way if my setup is more complex than a single droplet running everything, I can save some money on VPS's that don't need public IPv4 addresses (the database servers, application servers, etc.)
For Comcast and the like, once again give me the option to either do NAT64 or a full dual stack. As a regular consumer I probably won't care. As a gamer or a developer I might.
The IPv6 transition is going to happen sooner or later. Either you are going to make it painless for your customers by providing IPv6 early and using strategies to make the transition to IPv6-only smoother or you are going to make your customers suffer.
It won't help. If they charge $4+$1, it would not be seen as "they just changed the price structure". It would be seen as "they are charging for something that used to be free". Especially as marketing folks won't miss the chance of advertising "our package is now $4" small print "( additional charges apply)". And most customers will be royally pissed at that, both by the fact that they got advertised $4 but have to pay $5 and by the fact something that used to be free now isn't. The fact that the whole package costs the same won't matter, people don't think in those terms. And then it would get the neutrality angle - they now charge extra for using specific protocols! we warned about this and now it happens! - and the whole thing would become a huge mess.
It's already happening. Most providers charge $1-2/month for every additional IPv4 address AND you have to justify why you need it. EC2's Elastic IP's also don't get added to EC2 instances automatically; you have to add them manually and newly opened accounts are limited to I believe 10 IPv4 addresses for all EC2 instances. That's what IPv4 exhaustion looks like today.
This has nothing to do with net neutrality. It's progress of technology. Your ISP doesn't give you IPX access do they? Instead this is a natural progression of technology. Want to use old tech? Pay a premium!
That's additional IPs. But one IP has been given for free (well, not in all setups, but in common packages). Unlike IPX. This may be progress for you, but for those who still need their IP setups working it's nothing but trouble. That's why it doesn't change - because people hate to change already working setups.
Ec2 instances not in a VPC get assigned a public IPv4 address when you create them. Elastic IPs are the re-assignable ones, and you only pay for them when they are unassigned. You don't pay for assigned ips on amazon
