> Much of this boils down to "IPv6 sucks because it's so different from IPv4"
In fact, "IPv6 sucks because it's not broken in the same ways as IPv4". NAT, for example, was only ever a hack to get around limited address space, and the fact that it 'hid' your internal network was an accidental side effect. People started architecting their networks around that, and now are annoyed that IPv6 isn't broken in the exact same way.
Saying that IPv4 gave you network privacy for free is like claiming that old-school single-line home phones were an advantage over personal cell phones because they gave you some amount of extra privacy 'for free'.
In fact, "IPv6 sucks because it's not broken in the same ways as IPv4". NAT, for example, was only ever a hack to get around limited address space, and the fact that it 'hid' your internal network was an accidental side effect. People started architecting their networks around that, and now are annoyed that IPv6 isn't broken in the exact same way.
Saying that IPv4 gave you network privacy for free is like claiming that old-school single-line home phones were an advantage over personal cell phones because they gave you some amount of extra privacy 'for free'.