Why do we still need IPv4 when we are migrating to IPv6...

[Anfinsen, Ragnar]

On 12.02.15, 01.05, "Ca By" <cb.list6 at gmail.com<mailto:cb.list6 at gmail.com>> wrote:

I always cringe when folks say premium internet.  Internet is always "best effort", we are all always reduced to the least common denominator for network quality.

Sure, but doing CGN or equivalent reduces the best effort of IPv4 even further, and we want to uphold the quality as much as possible.

I would say networks that only have ipv4 are not doing their best effort.  There will not be suitable truly ipv6-only offering in the next 10 Years because of these laggards.

That said, buying ipv4 makes me feel ill. Please put ipv4 where it belong in the cgn / nat64 / MAP br / aftr.

Ipv4 is not premium, it is legacy services deployed by companies on a downward slide. . My customers care about fb and google and netflix, those are top services and all on ipv6

Appreciate your feedback, but as long as the majority of Norwegian content providers does not move on IPv6, including governmental sites, and the potential risk of the Norwegian government implementing some sort of Data Retention Directive, it makes sense to by addresses instead of doing CGN or equivalent.

/Ragnar