It IS a success, but it's a success that is singularly enabled by the #1 thing that ipv6 people hate with a passion: a NAT. The evil NAT that has kept IPV4 address space alive, that was the crutch that kept ipv6 from being adopted earlier. The evil NAT isn't a firewall, the evil NAT can be replaced by string-of-acronyms.
And, it's a success which paves the way for practically any protocol to replace ipv6 as the real successor, like the casually thrown out ipv4.4++v2, which is getting dismissed right and left by the ipv6 people here. Or god forbid a better protocol. Please give me ipv8.
Not that I was in the room, but it's apparent that the mobile success is due to the fact the cartel of phone makers and spectrum owners/mobile carriers got in a room and adopted ipv6 head to toe.
I would like to know if the FCC had a role here, or it's just that the mobile carrier industry is used to adopting new standards so this wasn't a big deal, or it was the OEMs that enforced/enabled it.
For the rest of ipv4-land, where is this cooperation/regulation/coordination for migrating?
My comcast modems do not support ipv6 last I tried, but that was three years ago. Maybe the magic wand has been waved finally. But I look at this thread and think: Eh, nope.