> So ‘just’ doing that causes literally all the exact same problems as what we had with IPv6… To be fair, there’s a lot of other changes with IPv6 that could h

> So ‘just’ doing that causes literally all the exact same problems as what we had with IPv6… To be fair, there’s a lot of other changes with IPv6 that could have been simplified or approached in a more IPv4 familiar way: - ARP instead of NDP - DHCP instead of SLAAC, DHCPv6, DHCPv6-PD, etc - IP syntax (periods vs colons and square brackets) - IP header design (extension headers/non fixed size approach for the header) - NAT support from the get-go (you can debate the evils of NAT all you want- not including it from the start was a net negative against IPv6 adoption) - Private IP RFC1918 style space instead of the ULA addressing Probably missed a few others. It’s the whole ecosystem you need to take into account. Too many changes were attempted at the same time.