[rpd] Statistics on IPV4 allocation in Africa as of 2016

[Mark Tinka]

On 17/Jun/16 10:29, Owen DeLong wrote:

> All four major providers (AT&T, VZ, T-Mo, even SPRINT) in the US have managed this supposedly difficult
> feat at this point.
>
> This means that current handsets from most manufacturers, notably Apple, Samsung which represent the vast majority of the market already have the support available.
>
> I don’t know to what extent this support depends on LTE deployment which I admit is not particularly widespread in Africa as yet. I’m sure it probably isn’t going to work on the remaining 2G networks.
>
> So I don’t think that it necessarily takes so much commercial will today as you may think it does.

It doesn't, really. I used the words "perceived", "seem" and "if", as a
dig to the mobile operators.

IMHO, this is all very possible (as we've seen with Sprint, Verizon,
AT&T, and in particular, T-Mobile). The only reason it is not happening
in Africa is because it is "believed" to be "difficult", and it's just
so much "simpler" and "easier" to spend millions on CG-NAT instead.

3GPP specs. mandate IPv6 be supported on LTE networks, with IPv4 being
optional. As I do not run a mobile network, I don't know how this is
actually being implemented by the mobile operators.

But both of the mobile networks I use in South Africa offer me a 4G/LTE
service, but with no IPv6. I am currently in Uganda running off a 4G
data service from my hotel, no IPv6 on that either.

Mark.