On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 8:22 PM Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:

real compatibility with ipv4 was disdained. the transition plan was
dual stack and v4 would go away in a handful of years. the 93
transition mechanisms were desperate add-ons when v4 did not go away.
and dual stack does not scale, as it requires v4 space proportional to
deployed v6 space.

What I find most peculiar about this whole rant (not just yours but the whole thread) is that I may be the only one who found implementing IPv6 with dual stack completely trivial and a non issue? There is no scale issue nor any of the other rubbish.

Some say what we have is not a true dual stack setup because we run MPLS and the IPv6 mostly lives inside L2VPN or L3VPN tunnels. Most of our network gear has no idea what an IPv6 address is. But neither does that equipment touch the public IPv4 internet. Nevertheless we configure our IPv4 and IPv6 both only on our few edge Juniper MX devices and that is it. I do not believe IPv6 has 100 config lines in my network total.

For all I care we already have a perfect working system with IPv4+CGN+IPv6. The CGN part was the most troublesome, not the IPv6.

Regards,

Baldur