Re: Not that awful
"BTW, who likes NAT? I can only think of one real advantage it has."
The trouble is that most users thing NAT means most of their devices are hidden from the Internet automatically: a secure-first situation. But from what I've read, this isn't totally true. The ISP (which provides your IP address/block) can actually directly connect into your LAN with a little knowledge and the proper routing tables. If the ISP can do that, anyone else (like the State) can persuade/coerce the ISP to do it on their behalf.
Until such an event makes the news and breaks the myth of NAT "invisibility", it's gonna be hard to convince people.
PS. To all those saying just extend IPv4, the problem is that IPv4 can't be extended. It's 32-bit address and 16-bit port limits are hard-coded. Because of this, devices that only grok IPv4 can ONLY address devices with IPv4 addresses: no ifs, ands, or buts. It's like trying to cram 24 eggs in a carton only built for 12; something will break along the way. So your only option is to start fresh, and if you're going to start fresh, why not try to keep the issues you're having now from cropping up in the future? Things like overly-complicated routing tables, the kind that are knocking routers to their knees...