IPv6 is not possible to fix - does not matter who is guilty. It is bad design because it was a "consensus" (read "compromise") between different politicians pushing IPv4, IPX, Apple Talk, Apollo Domain, DEC net, banyan VINES, etc. IPv6 has satisfied all requests - it is really flexible architecture.
IPv6 inside P2P tunnel (with all features disabled) - is actually not IPv6. The statistics is misleading, almost all installations are residential/mobile where all first-hop functionality is cancelled. Actual IPv6 progress (where 1st hop complexity is exercised) is below 1%. IMHO: It could not surpass 1% long-term. Eduard -----Original Message----- From: Saku Ytti <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, November 5, 2025 11:26 To: North American Network Operators Group <[email protected]> Cc: Marco Moock <[email protected]>; Vasilenko Eduard <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Artificial Juniper SRX limitations preventing IPv6 deployment (and sales) On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 at 08:27, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG <[email protected]> wrote: > There is no possibility of canceling the "subnet" concept for business. > IPv6 subnet complexity is too much burden for businesses. > Hence, IPv4 will stay for business forever. You may very well be right, but it doesn't have to be that. And if it is, we are to blame, we were here when it happened. Dual stack is expensive, complicated and reduces availability and quality. End users ultimately pay a premium for lower quality because of what we did, not to mention the companies which will never exist to compete with oligarchs, because procuring sufficient amounts of IPv4 addresses was too large a barrier to compete already in an uneven playing field. We should have been single stack for more than a decade by now, with IPv4 being IPX or AppleTalk, relegated to some odd corners. And yes, we can pull various metrics to show 'no, things are actually progressing swimmingly', but that just stops us from looking into the mirror and accepting we cocked this up badly and need to do something meaningful and real. _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/VMI27Y4J2TZU3U537QMCMIQDJ7LWCDKI/
