The world in which IPv6 was a good design (2017)
2010 saw the introduction of CurveCP[0], and 2011 its first implementation. It solves a most of what IPv6 does (and then some). The thing it does give up is complete symmetry - there IS a difference between client and server.<p>But we&#x27;ve effectively already given that up with NATs (and CGNATs), with essentially nothing lost[1], so I&#x27;d much rather have given that up willfully and get all the great things CurveCP has to offer, rather than the mess that is IPv6<p>An evolved version called MinimalT (published 2013[2], implemented then and e.g. in 2014[3]) goes much farther, with DNS integration, some DoS protection, and a few other nice properties while being faster than TCP&#x2F;IP, and still being IPv4.<p>Instead we have QUIC and IPv6.<p>[0] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.curvecp.org&#x2F;addressing.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.curvecp.org&#x2F;addressing.html</a><p>[1] And that&#x27;s unfortunate - but peer to peer is essentially irrelevant now, when every communication service people actually like uses a server these days.<p>[2] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;cr.yp.to&#x2F;tcpip&#x2F;minimalt-20130522.pdf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;cr.yp.to&#x2F;tcpip&#x2F;minimalt-20130522.pdf</a><p>[3] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;nimbus-network&#x2F;minimalt" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;nimbus-network&#x2F;minimalt</a>