Your right in some ways but not in others, I agree Google will not denounce IPV4 until its widespread, but also ipv6 will not become wide spread until there is business need.
Take another example. HTML 5 great technology, but it was never going to have a huge hold until the likes of Apple and Google dropped support for Adobe flash (admittedly different reasons), but it will take a push. Most likely there will be some new services for IPV6 (can't think of any for now) which people will want and will for some reason only be on IPV6 only, as people start to migrate this trend is picked up the large providers, and they will also start to offer IPV6 only services (whilst keeping their old services on line). You will also start to see alot of marketing as well, like for DLNA, tablet computing etc.
At some point there will be so much momentum that IPV4 services will be given a limited life, and then that's its the pressure will be huge for every thing and every one to migrate.

Or IPV6 dies......

Trust me there is a lot of forward planning going on. Where i work now ( very large global company) all IT equipment has to support IPV6, but its all turned off. We are waiting for that trigger, and its a massive change as well. not just a home router upgrade, These roll out project costs many millions. Until there is a business case there will be no migration to IPV6 by the vast majority of companies.

Also a quick read of the article you posted shows just what i have said, its not happening....... be prepared but don't enable is a general concept being followed by a large number of companies

In reply to a post by AndrewW:

Most likely there will be some new services for IPV6 (can't think of any for now)

DirectAccess for Windows 7 and 8

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

it does seem a old british trademark to use old things until they break, no forward planning.

PlusNet and BTretail experimenting with Carrier Grade NAT is insane.

If more people in the UK could speak Asian languages it would be more important, as there are a lot of websites in Asia that are ONLY available on IPv6, as their ISPs only had small IPv4 allocations in the first place so ran out first.

a point to make on ROI, zen have lost me as a potential customer plus 4 business associates of mine who have their own people they have influence over as well.

I got BE over 10 business customers 4 years ago based on a reccomendation from me.

So dont assume either the ROI is a slam dunk.

I think we done on this subject anyway, you guys think its a ROI decision only I think it isnt.

So I take it your 4 business associates had a real need for IPv6 too with their internet connection? That does not seem a logical reason to not recommend an ISP "because they don't do IPv6" when the business probably doesn't care about IPv6.

To a small and medium business (say up to 100 employees), in most cases, they want good service, good bandwidth, a few static IP address etc. Even if you gave them IPv6 they wouldn't have the technical expertise to implement IPv6 services properly if at all. If they are quite technical even things like connection pings/routing, capacity, no throttling or bandwidth shaping still take more priority over IPv6.

You aren't putting a sensible argument together other than saying IPv6 is important for the sake of the internet, heck you haven't even given a reason why you need IPv6!

I'm going to put the predictable smiley in because I'm not trying to negatively argue with you, I am just putting some points across that I think you are not considering fully.

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

No I don't think we're saying that at all. We are saying there needs to be a clear business case before an ISP moves to IPv6.... and remember, this cost may get passed onto you as the customer too.. I have zero need for IPv6 at the moment, the fact my connection is lacking IPv6 is affecting the way I go about using the internet pretty much 0%. Therefore why would I be bothered about it as a customer?

If we were talking about a mass-market consumer ISP then I might well agree with you but we aren't. Zen is supposed to be focused towards the business/pro-user market segment who have different needs from your average punter. I'm currently in the process of setting up some new hosted services and because I'm aware of the issues surrounding IPv4 exhaustion I'm planning ahead and implementing IPv6 so that I'm ready when the take-up does accelerate. While it is possible to debug and test from an IPv4 connection by using a tunnel broker having native IPv6 is certainly preferable.

I expect Zen to have the forethought to provision extra capacity in their network before it is needed and I'd have hoped they would have taken the same attitude to IPv6. Ironically the thing that is stopping me from jumping ship to a provider that does support IPv6 is IPv4! Since IPv4 top level exhaustion fewer ISPs are willing to supply a routed subnet to new customers and those that do often charge a monthly fee for the privilege.

You seem to be making an argument that is circular as far as ISP customers' needs are concerned. The reason most customers don't need IPv6 at the moment is because there aren't a significant number of services that require it, but the reason there aren't more services is because providers haven't rolled out IPv6 to customers...and so on. Anyway IPv6 is coming, around the world ISPs are beginning to provide it and the Internet does need it.

Edited by Spud2003 (Sun 08-Dec-13 17:29:24)

In reply to a post by Spud2003:

But the reason there aren't more services is because providers haven't rolled out IPv6 to customers...and so on.

Economics is circular... Of course the internet needs it, I am well aware of the benefits of IPv6, but it is not the be all and end all of broadband connections now. The very fact I am with Zen and have a router that doesn't work with IPv6 is good enough proof that the majority of people can do without it at this moment in time, quite frankly if it was impacting me I would have left a long time ago. There are other things that Zen do which annoy me far more than not having IPv6 (such as becoming less and less transparent).

I would expect them to be announcing plans towards the end of next year definitely, but it really isn't important now. It is like when I bought a router that is ADSL2+ compatible back in 2006. I am still on ADSL1 in 2013! Needless to say I have been through 2 routers since then anyway and if I do get put on ADSL2+ or FTTC I will be upgrading my router again.

What it is very easy to forget (myself included) that the majority of people who have broadband connections are not interested these technical details, as long as it runs their webserver and possibly exchange server, and lets employees get on google and make VPN connections, they are happy. They are not going to waste time and money (after such a big recession) upgrading their ASA, threat management, and client operating systems to support IPv6 for the sake of it.

I think if you read and digest the replies from Zen and how they specifically say "not on broadband connections" it is clear that some of their expensive broadband equipment does not support it, this is a lot of money to replace and they are probably evaluating trends and replacement equipment (given how FTTC is becoming much more popular) going forward.

what they need isnt relevant here, they follow my guidance.

However I prefer to have ipv6 since I have to rollout ipv6 on websites and I need to test that connectivity, currently I use tunnels which works but I would prefer to not need to. Tbats one you havent thought off.

As always some people have influence over others and I have influence over some business owner's choice of isp's, with whats happening to BE they need to find a new isp, I havent suggested one to them yet. But it wont be zen now. Although ipv6 isnt the only reason it is a factor. I will probably point all of them to aaisp.

Edited by Chrysalis (Sun 08-Dec-13 20:44:26)