Alan, Is that really the case though? I think we are at the thin end of the wedge on IPV6 experience, we still learn about V4 issues today.
CGNAT is not as expensive as many think it is, sadly at some point in time, unfortunately, we will all need it. The most exciting technical challenge I accept is one where it can’t be done because of money! Regards, Neil. On 07/11/2016, 20:31, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: Hi, > but hey!) but think of all the suckers^w "innovators" that deployed it ten > years ago that will have spent a fortune with probably at least two cycles > of hardware... as always predicted people would move when they needed... suckers? you mean those that already have a better understanind of the protocol, have the required extra monitoring, scripts etc, understand client behaviours etc - that hardware cycle occurs anyway - and when VM finally get around to deploying it, they'll see that most of their traffic as an eyeballs network will be IPv6 - all that youtube, google, netflix etc - just needs the client to actually have IPv6 connectivity VM are probably looking to move because of the cost of their next CG-NAT upgrade ;-) alan
