| NAT444 is fine |
We don't need that many addresses |
We have no roadmap for native IPv6 as we rolled out 6RD. |
We forgot to include IPv6 in our last RFP |
I don't want to expose my MAC address |
| We have IPv6, but we just want to keep things simple |
We've still got plenty of IPv4 |
Our Dynamic DNS doesn't support it |
We would have to rewrite our entire application to support it |
Those stupid Privacy Extension addresses keep changing |
| We'll deploy IPv6 next financial year |
Our Lawful Intercept doesn't support IPv6 yet |
 |
End users don't care about IPv6 |
We'll deploy IPv6 right after we deploy DNSSEC |
| Larger headers are less efficient |
Can't we just buy more IPv4 addresses? |
Our business intelligence team can't even parse IPv4 logfiles |
IPv6 isn't an Internet Standard yet |
IPv6 just isn't a priority |
| None of our customers want it |
I don't want to lose the security provided by NAT |
No one else has deployed it |
My transit provider doesn't support IPv6 |
We don't have a lab to test it |
Made with excuses from