>Not "from scratch" but there are tons of routers that either don't support IPv6 or have broken support and thus need to be replaced.
A fair point. Many older (and possibly some current) consumer routers don't support IPv6 and would obviously need to be replaced.
That said, AFAICT, all the Tier I and Tier II providers and most major ISPs routing infrastructures support IPv6. Depressingly, many of those don't offer IPv6 to their customers.
This is anecdata, but my ISP (Spectrum) doesn't offer IPv6 to me (presumably based on my location), but does offer it to other customers.
And unless (this is US-centric, I know it's different elsewhere) you have an organization of a certain size[0], and most small businesses and consumers aren't anywhere near big enough, one needs to rely on their ISP for IPv6 allocations/support.
I'd add that most modern (last 10-15 years) OS implementations have IPv6 baked in, and most routers have supported dual stack for quite some time, IPv6 should be much more widely deployed in the US.
According to Google[1], less than half their users (~41%) access their services via IPv6. That's a significant increase since 2013 or so, but I suspect much of that is because India has ~80% IPv6 utilization.
All that said, I hope IPv6 adoption increases across the world in the near to medium term, and more importantly (to me at least) that my ISP starts offering it in my area.
Spectrum doesn't offer IPv6 to me, but does offer it to other customers
There's something they have to change to turn on IPv6 for your area, whether it's swapping a CMTS or updating an IPAM database or whatever, and that change costs both time and money so Spectrum is gradually rolling it out across the network. The cost of the migration is so large that it has to be spread over a decade or more so the shareholders don't revolt. It's frustrating but it's not evil (if they truly hated IPv6 they'd just never support it at all).
>There's something they have to change to turn on IPv6 for your area, whether it's swapping a CMTS or updating an IPAM database or whatever, and that change costs both time and money so Spectrum is gradually rolling it out across the network.
That's a plausible hypothesis.
Another one is that Spectrum likes the revenue it can generate from the scarcity of IPv4 addresses, especially with a captive market who can't (for the same reasons I mentioned WRT IPv6[0]) get their own IPv4 allocation.
Renting out a few million static IP addresses at $5 a pop is pure profit.
But you may well be right.
But from my perspective it's a distinction without a difference.
A fair point. Many older (and possibly some current) consumer routers don't support IPv6 and would obviously need to be replaced.
That said, AFAICT, all the Tier I and Tier II providers and most major ISPs routing infrastructures support IPv6. Depressingly, many of those don't offer IPv6 to their customers.
This is anecdata, but my ISP (Spectrum) doesn't offer IPv6 to me (presumably based on my location), but does offer it to other customers.
And unless (this is US-centric, I know it's different elsewhere) you have an organization of a certain size[0], and most small businesses and consumers aren't anywhere near big enough, one needs to rely on their ISP for IPv6 allocations/support.
I'd add that most modern (last 10-15 years) OS implementations have IPv6 baked in, and most routers have supported dual stack for quite some time, IPv6 should be much more widely deployed in the US.
According to Google[1], less than half their users (~41%) access their services via IPv6. That's a significant increase since 2013 or so, but I suspect much of that is because India has ~80% IPv6 utilization.
All that said, I hope IPv6 adoption increases across the world in the near to medium term, and more importantly (to me at least) that my ISP starts offering it in my area.
[0] https://www.arin.net/resources/guide/ipv6/first_request/#end...
[1] https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=ipv6...