<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /></head><body style='font-size: 10pt'>
<p>On 15/06/2016 15:57, Michael Oghia wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><!-- html ignored --><!-- head ignored --><!-- meta ignored -->
<div dir="ltr">Hi all,
<div> </div>
<div>While following this thread, it occurred to me that one issue not being discussed is Netflix's encouragement to revert to IPv4. Of course, that is fairly easy with NAT, but the principle is one that makes me feel very uncomfortable. We work so hard to see IPv6 expanded, it feels like a small setback -- or at least a jab -- coming from such a large company.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thus, the question I pose to the community is this: are there any redress mechanisms we can use to address this situation at the core of the issue, i.e., with Netflix, and help them work out solutions -- like some of the ones offered so far -- to not discourage IPv6? This can include meetings, mobilizing networks, relationship building, outreach, etc.</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div> </div>
<div>If HE started dishing out tunnels this week, maybe it could be addressed, script/database changes to ensure U.S. residents get a slice of different pie, that netflix could whitelist, but since its been going for many many years, that is not possible, not easily possible anyway without dropping and changing all existing U.S. users which would bring about a tsunami of complaints for other reasons, so no, HE wont be doing anything in the future :)</div>
<div> </div>
<div>-- <br />
<table border="1" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: center;"><small><small>If you have the urge to reply to all rather than reply to list, you best first read http://members.ausics.net/qwerty/</small></small></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</body></html>