Hello Tony,   
      
   On Friday February 02 2018 06:46, you wrote to me:   
      
    TL> 2.  This ISP is one where they communicate well with users, and they   
    TL> don't assume users are ignorant of tech issues.  In fact, they   
    TL> probably have the highest proportion of tech savvy users of any ISP.   
    TL> Therefore, any such change in the future is likely to be well   
    TL> communicated.  They are also likely to keep dual stack going as long   
    TL> as feasible.   
      
   Perhaps as long as they exist. My first ISP was HCCnet. An ISP created by the   
   Hobby Compter Club. They were very tech friendly. But they were small. And the   
   small ones get eaten by the big ones. That was the end tech friendly...   
      
    TL> 3.  This also requires liaison with the group running the other end of   
    TL> the tunnel.   
      
    TL> Liklihood is it's far enough in the future that one or both ends will   
    TL> see a generational change of hardware, and there will be a more   
    TL> compelling reason to upgrade and change things around other than   
    TL> "because I can" or "future proofing", and that time is going to be a   
    TL> better time to make the change. :)   
      
   Perhaps. Trying to look too far in the future is not always fruitful. Yes, I   
   agree that in your case it probably makes sense to wait a while...   
      
    MvV>> I say IPv4 /is/ broke. It has run out of addresses and we have   
    MvV>> to resort to ever more complex work arounds to keep it working.   
      
    TL> True.   
      
   So we agree on that. Good!   
      
      
   Cheers, Michiel   
      
   --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303   
    * Origin: he.net certified sage (2:280/5555)