> "IPv6 wasn't about turning IPv4 off, but about ensuring the internet could continue to grow without breaking,"

Then it's failure is by design. I should not want to multiplex/bridge different versions of the network-layer protocol; and certainly not to avoid using the new protocol because the old one seems more usable and approachable.

▲

wmf 5 hours ago | parent [-]

I think the original plan was definitely to turn IPv4 off. Obviously that's probably not practical in our lifetimes.

▲

convolvatron 2 hours ago | parent [-]

it was an explicit non goal to ever schedule the end of ipv4

	▲	p_l 5 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		The problem is that the scheduled end of ipv4 was reached in 1990. But attempts at providing replacement were stymied - IETF went not-invented-here finally getting v6, while USGOV went with CLNS, and meanwhile vendors hemmed and hewed to avoid spending any money on actually implementing changes and then allowed NAT availability to crush arguments and mandates.