> It is sort of dissapointing the industry is stubbornly pushing ahead, even after decades Then tell us how that magical "compatible" protocol would look like.

> It is sort of dissapointing the industry is stubbornly pushing ahead, even after decades Then tell us how that magical "compatible" protocol would look like. It's compatible as much as both can coexist and also IP stacks expose a backwards compatible API making it relatively easy for applications to support both. > IPv4 sunset is an illusion. We're stuck with it to the end, and no incompatible protocol will replace it. The ongoing support of the IPv4 is itself not so much a problem, it's there, you don't have to change much if anything. The problem is more of getting v6 support into each and every network device (mostly done now) and overcome the laziness to also configure v6. The "support both" problem is more the other way around, having to also support v4 makes much of the nice features of v6 (e.g. more flexible or in some sense easier configuration) less beneficial so they can not work as a driver to adopt it. I also don't think v4 sunset is an illusion, there will surely be a tipping point somewhere (hard to predict) where some decide v4 is no longer worth the hassle for each and everything pushing the last non-v6 holdouts forward. Sure v4 will not be completely go away anytime soon I think, more of a slow fade out. A big problem nowadays may be that the impact of the IPv4 address exhaustion is distributed unevenly making it really painful for some maintaining v4 connectivity compared to simply activate IPv6 while others can still comfortable ignore it. This may also lead to v6 being deprioritized by those who badly need it because you have to put so much hard work into making v4 work somehow, you can't do without anyway.