In reply to a post by Michael_Chare:

It is not obvious on the Hyperoptic website that you don't get a public IP address. How many other ISPs use CG NAT? (Mobile phone companies apart.) They could of course reduce their charge for a plublic IP address

In the UK few, but this is just luck. Hyperoptic is a young ISP in comparison. IPv4 has run out, and the longer the big ISPs such as Virgin, Plusnet, and others don't provide IPv6 to their customers, the longer this confusion will continue.

It still requires a fundamental change to be able to move to IPv6. It is not a priority for most companies to do so as it just costs money to implement and there is no business benefit for the average company to do so. Until companies hands are forced it just won't happen on the scale needed to make a difference.

When you say

we have to cover the cost of renting the IP

, what cost is that and who charges the rent? I thought IP blocks were bought for a one-off payment, and that's why there is a market for trading them.
Many other ISPs don't charge monthly fees for static IP addresses.

The big ISPs either tend to charge for static or don't offer it at all on consumer products. It tends to be the more niche ISPs that give static IPs as standard.

EDIT : Sky, BT and TalkTalk do not offer static IP on consumer packages - that covers the vast majority of users in the UK. Virgin also don't offer static either.

Edited by ian72 (Tue 03-Mar-20 15:15:34)

In Asia there are websites and ISPs that only run v6. This hasn't affected people in Europe as generally we don't speak or read the language. Countries experencing large amounts of growth have hit this, before europe or the US. Maybe because their original allocation of v4 was quite small.

Yes, in the UK it is not needed today, but that time will come eventually. It is crazy we are not ready for it.

Some do offer static IPs - e.g. Plusnet who make a one-off charge of £5 for residential users (free for business users) although they don't offer IPv6 at all.
I don't see the need to make a monthly charge (other than profiteering) if a static IP address is provided - the cost to the ISP is not recurring.

When my revolution comes, CGNAT will be illegal unless you offer a public static IPv6 and offering public static IPv6 will be mandatory

These interim systems are notoriously problematic, Akamai state they've seen CGNAT overwhelmed where IPv6 carries on working. They are also carrying more and more v6 traffic than ever before. The revolution is coming, and many UK ISPs are providing dual stack, so why not the others?
https://blogs.akamai.com/2020/02/at-21-tbps-reaching...

There aren't that many that provide static IP on consumer products that don't charge monthly - PlusNet are one of the few in that respect.

When something like 80% of users are on the big 4 and none of them offer it then it shows that it isn't a priority for most people.

I think the charge is to discourage people from using a very small pool of addresses - it is more a punitive charge than relating to direct costs. If it was a one off at £5 then a lot of new ISPs might see their small allocation disappear very quickly.

I assume its an admin headache, because the idea of sharing IP address went with the death of dial up.