I know that IPv6 was created in 1998 as a future-proofing, to make sure that there will be enough IP addresses in the works for large networks. IPv4 uses 32 bits and is represented with denary (0-9) while IPv6 uses 128 bits, so there are far more possible addresses, and it is represented using hexadecimal (0-9 then A-F).
What I’m wondering is why IPv4 is still so common, even though the number of devices connected to the internet have skyrocketed with more computers, laptops, smartphones, game consoles, embedded systems, etc. all connected! If it was thought that there would be too few available addresses in 1998, surely that has to be a bigger problem in the modern day?
Additionally, why didn’t IPv6 replace v4, even after nearly three decades of existing? Is it a technological limitation, cost, or something else?
And online I see many sysadmins online (!) complaining about IPv6 being more difficult to work with. Is this because the addresses are harder to remember, are adaptations of the protocol by manufacturers all different (similar to USB-C), or is there some other problem with IPv6? Or is this a case of a loud angry minority, especially in chat forums where people tend to have more polarised views?
Many devices do support IPv6, but it’s not universal like IPv4, despite the standard existing since 1998 and having many advantages. Why is this?
One of the main issues I think is holding IPv6 back is that we keep needing to memorize IPs and type them by hand. 192.168.0.16, 172.16.0.0/12, and 10.0.0.0/8 are easy to remember, and usually it’s just the last number that’s important, anyway, because we all use 192.168.1.0/24 by default.
But then IPv6 comes along with /48 prefixes and endless numbers to read, analyze (same subnet? typos?), memorize or write down. Ain’t nobody got time for that.
IPv6 would have to integrate some sort of DNS resolver on a network level so that people can work with computer names. That would make the hostname actually relevant and not have every Windows be called DESKTOP-W38D6M5P. If you already have a separate DNS service, it’s only the registration step that has slightly more friction, but still.
E: I guess you could argue that it’s a UI problem. IPv6 has neighbor discovery and the UI can just show a list to choose from. Still no hostnames, though. Is configuration part of a layer’s responsibility?
You should see the unfinished proposal for ipv8. The authors think yes to a large degree, though not how you’re thinking.
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-thain-ipv8-00.html
This is a bigger deal than you may think. Those of us stubborn enough to use one of the other defined internal network ranges already hit more obstacles than we should, and that difference should be trivial to non-existent.
For me the latest is a smart home device that hard-coded 192.168.1.x, so I am not able to connect it to my network
Most network devices can have multiple IPs. Assign 192.168.1.1 to your router (in addition to your normal up) and it should probably start routing traffic to that device