> There’s a lot less effort required to update an existing IPv4 system to accept a few more ranges than to entirely rearchitect a network to work with IPv6. I'

> There’s a lot less effort required to update an existing IPv4 system to accept a few more ranges than to entirely rearchitect a network to work with IPv6. I'm not so sure, actually. It's still a case of literally billions of devices that just plain need to be replaced. Not to mention millions(?) of multimillion dollar routers that need to be scrapped, even though they handle IPv4 and IPv6 in silicon just fine. > But as to the actual proposition, I would rather the 240/4 space was changed to RFC1918 private space, or at least half of it. Nobody's stopping you. It'll never be usable on the Internet anyway.