In this case, that's also going away hard next year when Microsoft discontinues support for Windows XP. At that point it'd be really tempting to suggest switching to Firefox or Chrome, both of which do support SNI.
Why do you want to use global CAs for internal services? Wouldn't it be better to use your own CA? I find out that identifying site by it's certfingerprint is much stronger authentication than the fact that it got valid cert. Actually it would be a good idea not to trust any other than company's internal CA for internal services. But as far as I know, bowsers aren't up to this challenge. Maybe AD allows this, but I haven't ever seen any post how to do it.
If we'd get to it and get IPv6 up, the business of selling static IPs should become a very unprofitable as there would be a virtually unlimited supply of IPs. Why is this not happening?!?
For the same reason that SSL adoption is currently lower than ideal, for many uses the increased cost (actual cost, and cost of time) is not perceived to be worth it. For many/most uses IPv4 works just fine and non-SSL is just fine.
Don't forget the cost and barrier to entry of setting up the cert and SSL and learning to administer the extra steps well, without introducing more holes through complexity.
Presuming you're noting exponentiation with ^, 4 billion ^ 4 billion addresses would mean 128 gigabits per address. IPv6 addresses don't take up half a gigabyte each in any sane encoding.
IPv6 has 128-bit addresses, which works out to about 4 billion ^ 4 addresses, not 4 billion ^ 4 billion addresses.
