[nwellinghoff]

I think it might be as simple as ipv4 is just nicer to look at…maybe we should have just done “ipv5” and added another block. Eg 1.1.1.1.1. I know its stupid, but ipv6 addresses are just so hard to remember and look at that I think its just human nature to gravitate towards the simplicity of ipv4.

[ajsnigrutin]

The problem with "add another block" is, that you have to change everything everywhere to make it work... and if you're changing everything, why not expand it properly.

Only a tiny minority of people have to look at those addresses, the majority just types "facebook", enter, clicks on first google result and gets facebook (because ".com" is too hard to write).

[globular-toast]

Who remembers IPv4 addresses? If you have more than a small handful of devices in your network you're probably going to want some kind of name service.

[denkmoon]

dead::beef is just as memorable as 1.1.1.1, and my v6 delegated prefix is just as unmemorable as my public v4. The "easier to remember" argument just sucks hard.

[dboreham]

This was all discussed at length in 1993.

[swiftcoder]

I don't think many people are memorising a bunch of wildly different IPv4 addresses either.

At best, I remember the prefix of my private network, and a handful of single-number suffixes of important hosts (i.e. my LAN is 192.168.1.x, and I remember that .100 is my local file server...)

[throw0101a]

> I think it might be as simple as ipv4 is just nicer to look at…maybe we should have just done “ipv5” and added another block. Eg 1.1.1.1.1.

This was discussed in the early 1990s. Criteria that were to be used for selecting then-IPng (§5.1: 10^12 / 2^40 was the minimum):

* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1726

The winning proposal, SIPP, was originally 'only' 64 bits, but it was decided to go to 128:

* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1752

> I know its stupid, but ipv6 addresses are just so hard to remember and look at that I think its just human nature to gravitate towards the simplicity of ipv4.

If only there was a system that allowed for easy to remember human labels to be translated to a machine-usable sequence of bits that we call "an address"…

[nwellinghoff]

Eh. Judging by the large negative response I think the point might still have a point. Can you quickly rattle out ipv6 cidr blocks when you are setting up network configs? Most can grok and crank on ipv4 no problem. But for ipv6…its to the calculator. Not saying its a valid reason. Just saying ppl are lazy sooo if you want something adopted you might have to lean into lazy.

[miyuru]

How did you access HN? is it by typing its IPv4 address?

[theideaofcoffee]

I have difficulty remembering ten numbers, why do I have to say 1-212-487-1965 when I can just say Santa Rosita 71965? Maybe we should have just done another exchange name and added another name. Eg Hawthorne Santa Rosita 71965. I know its stupid, but 10 digit phone numbers are just so hard to remember and look at that I think its just human nature to gravitate towards the simplicity of telephone exchange prefixes.

Yet again, another fundamental misunderstanding (either genuine or not, I'm not sure) about the low-level technologies and their origins that underpin all of this. "Can't we just..."? No.