Hi Stefan, I think you are very optimistic assuming that all ISP's suddenly will go IPv6. ;-) If they wanted to, they'd have done it already, right? I don't think that all will have a complete solution ready by then, maybe by 2017-2020 this will finally dawn on them. Until then, I assume it'll look somewhat like that: - Some will take this as a business opportunity and state that they've "invented" IPv6 for their customers. - Some will progress to IPv6 because they're forced. - Some will see if they can reap benefits from the state for "modernizing". - Some will die and be absorbed by one of the above. I personally expect that in 2012 about 15-25 % of the ISP's in Europe are ready for IPv6, and even these numbers might be optimistic. What do the SixXS staff and the professionals here say? (I am curious to hear them object, I really would like to hear that I am too pessimistic.) Greetings, Michael

From Why SixXS?: "Our ultimate target is to conclude the tunnel brokering service when all the end users can get Native IPv6 directly from their own Internet provider. When this happens, SixXS will continue providing a GRH and other services that we will be releasing in the future, thus it won't be the end of SixXS." And I really don't think that every ISP in the world will have IPv6 per 2012 (even though that is 3 years away from now. The biggest issue there is that one would have to upgrade ALL the CPEs around the world and the intermediate infrastructure. This is more a 20 year project which has not really started yet. For the "Tunnel Broker" portion of SixXS, the biggest dependence on how long they will be there is on the PoPs and if the ISPs who are providing those want to keep on doing so, as long as they want to keep in on the game, they will be there for their users. I know from several people that they are actually quite happy with a tunnel broker kind of scheme because of the static IPv6 subnet one receives, even if you change the location where you live you can easily take your subnet along. IPv4 one keeps behind a NAT thus that works, IPv6 one uses the tunnel-brokered prefix. That way one really does not have to renumber. Only issue that could be there is latency based and that native connectivity should always outperform a tunneled connection of course.