I mean, v6 is still mostly a failure, so (rightly or not) the situation is going to be blamed on the people that have been pushing v6. That's just the cost of trying to push the entire world towards a new standard.
(I know that v6 has been a success within datacenters and such.)
by what definition would you call ipv6 "mostly a failure"? 30-40% global eyeball network (to the end user) adoption after ~10 years of active deployment, against very vocal opposition seems commendable enough to me.
More like 15 years of active deployment, and I'd expect levels at 90%. The world changed after IPv6 with smartphones that are controlled by a select few carriers, so it's easy to deploy IPv6 in which they're in dire need.
But the rest of the networks: enterprises, hosting providers, cloud providers, ISPs really don't give a shit. It's merely a cost centre or a burden.
(I know that v6 has been a success within datacenters and such.)
reply