This is undeniably true though as I am tasked as the security monitor for several tiny LANs, NOT letting every device have DMZ access has its advantages.
Maybe I'm just too greybeard to want to change. I love IPv6 for infrastructure and personal devices. For my home LAN and those I am responsible for, a tightly nailed down IPv4 environment is what I prefer.
I'll leave the massive address space and IoT readiness to you young and upcoming packet jockys, and in my retirement will marvel at the wonders you create.
For now, you'll get your DHCP and you'll like it if you want to stay in my house young man!
That's only 140 IP addresses per person. With things like microservices and IoT, we have already passed that.
Every major website uses hundreds of thousands of IP addresses each. Every part of your car has an IP address. Every digital sign in public places have IP addresses. Every electronic lock might have an IP address. Every electronic that you own might already have an IP address. Every light bulb in your house will have an IP address.
But yeah, IPv6 is needed. The solution I think is not to make ipv6 addresses shorter, but to make DNS ubiquitous.
If only ISPs in my country decided to actually give a shit about IPv6 instead of deciding to NAT even harder.
At this point aren't all that excess processing losing them money? Like, you can still sell IPv4 if that's how you make a profit but what reason do you have to not just click the "turn on IPv6" button that is probably there if your networking equipment is made in the last century or so????