It's no coincidence that one of the authors of that linked document is from Nokia (Charlie, who seems to be a real nice guy IRL). When the IETF had their meeting down in Adelaide last year, everyone thought that IPv6 was a good idea in principle, but would be in the near future too hard to implement.
Quite amusingly, it seemed to be the general consensus that considering the mobile
phone networks wanted a lot of new addresses and they came second then they can go and work it out and do IPv6 first.
In a way that makes sense, as all mobile phone networks are a walled garden layout more or less, which would make a ipv6 to ipv4 gateway much easier to build; you have to have a gateway for WAP anyway.
I really hope IPv6 gets up. I currently run it on some of my systems mainly to get network engineering and programming experience in the protocol. But only ever heard it mentioned once by a customer.
My conspiracy theory is that the large ISP don't run it because they are the oldest. The oldest have the bigger IPv4 address blocks as allocations were a lot freer years ago. This means they can be a little more flexible in allocating blocks to their customers than their newer IPv4-block-deprived competitors, which gives them a competitve advantage. If these big old ISPs had to stuggle for address like most newcomers do, then IPv6 would be here now.
Where's a policeman when you need one to blame the World Wide Web?