so then they'll advertise "network connection service" or something instead of internet service. people are pretty willing to accept when marketing makes up new words to avoid regulation, as long as the they are still getting a product that meets their needs. if consumers don't care about ipv6, no amount of renaming things is going to change that.
if you really want to drive ipv6 adoption, find a way to get free porn on it.
I will echo that many Azure services don’t support v6 yet, though.
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-network/ipv6-...
• ExpressRoute gateways CAN be used for IPv4-only traffic in a VNET with IPv6 enabled. Support for IPv6 traffic is on our roadmap.
• VPN gateways CANNOT be used in a VNET with IPv6 enabled, either directly or peered with "UseRemoteGateway".
• The Azure platform (AKS, etc.) does not support IPv6 communication for Containers.
• IPv6-only Virtual Machines or Virtual Machines Scale Sets are not supported, each NIC must include at least one IPv4 IP configuration.
• When adding IPv6 to existing IPv4 deployments, IPv6 ranges can not be added to a VNET with existing resource navigation links.
• Forward DNS for IPv6 is supported for Azure public DNS today but Reverse DNS is not yet supported.
That doesn't even being to cover it! There's all sorts of other fun limitations scattered all over the place, you'd have to spend weeks scraping them together into a pile of shame.
Examples include:
• The maximum prefix IPv6 prefix size available is just 16 addresses, which is hilariously tiny and totally negates the core benefit of IPv6's huge address space: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-network/publi...
• Forced NAT of IPv6, which entirely defeats the purpose and benefit of this protocol over IPv4.
• NAT doesn't interact with IPv6 address family. NAT can't be deployed on a subnet with an IPv6 prefix. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-network/nat-g...
• If you add an IPv6 address to a rule, [Azure] firewall fails. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/firewall/overview#kno...
• None of their PaaS services support IPv6 firewall rules. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40461803/allow-ipv6-addr...
Etc, etc, etc...
Imagine if in 2001 some company tried to sell an "Internet service" that didn't provide IPv4, or only provided RFC1918 addresses, or didn't allow something as trivial as non-NAT routing of IPv4, even as an option. They'd be sued for false advertising, and rightly so.
Meanwhile, in 2021 tier-1 cloud providers like Azure have an absolute shitshow of partial IPv6 support, yet they get away with advertising that they provide "Internet connectivity". They provide only private ranges, and force NAT for all IPv6 traffic. The vast majority of their services are IPv4 only, so enabling IPv6 is mostly pointless. Worse, if you do enable IPv6 on their virtual networks, this then disables unrelated IPv4 functionality. It's madness.