I'm not trying to attack your intelligence, I'm sure you have much greater knowledge in some areas, however, most of your arguments show a clear lack of understanding of IP networking and have no grounding in reality. I don't see how you can effectively comment on and attack an addressing scheme designed by Internetworking experts when you clearly don't understand networking yourself.
Of course they make sense because you can fit [way] more numbers in the same byte-space
No. There is no such thing as a 'base64 number'. Base64 is a way of encoding data into ASCII, and actually, it usually results in an output that is larger than the original. It is mainly used for transferring binary data over networks when it's simpler and safer to send ASCII than binary.
Current IP addresses are 32 bit (32 ones and zeros). This allows for 4 billion unique addresses. For display purposes, the 32 bits are split into four groups of 8 and shown as 8 bit integers of 0-255 (a.b.c.d). There is no way of fitting more addresses into this, by using base64 or any other encoding. It's just not possible.
In order to provide more addresses, you have to use more bits - 48, 64, 128 etc. Regardless of what number of bits you choose (they chose 128), or how you display them (they went for 8 groups of 16 bits, displayed as hex), you still can't get past the fact that this is a new scheme that requires a new IP stack. What difference would it of made if they increased IP space to 128 bit, but displayed them as base64? (which would be a stupid idea btw) You're not going to fit those 128 bits into 32.
What does RFID have to do with the Internet? That is a ridiculous question, isn't it? They can put them in light bulbs, and find out who has what light on, and when, in their home; put them in pills and find out if you took your assigned meds, etc. It is a total complete absolute monitoring and control paradigm.
Again, I ask, specifically, what RFID has to do with IPv6? An RFID tag is simply a small device with a unique ID (not an IP address) that can be read by a close proximity reader. RFID by itself is not related to the Internet or IP *at all*. You'd have to have a device in your house that reads all the RFID tags and made the information available over the Internet (which would be easily possible with IPv4)
There is absolutely no possibility of it dying out? Sorry, but you are sadly misinformed. Civilization and everything that goes with it has a 100% failure rate, and I see no signs of that ever changing
Your first post suggested you were hoping IPv6 would die out (due to your completely irrational worries about it), I assume to be replaced by something else (seeing as we clearly need more IP addresses than IPv4 allows). You stupidly suggested trying to magically cram more than 32 bits into 32 bits of space using encoding. IPv6 is the replacement, it's not going anywhere. Sure, if you want to be pedantic, in the distant future we'll all die out and so will computers, the Internet and everything that goes with it, but IPv6 is the future addressing scheme of the Internet. There's no question about that, get used to it.
IPv6 has absolutely no utility for me, nor for mankind in my opinion.
No utility for mankind? Lol
but it may result in 2 Internets. Many people in the USA do not want any part of IPv6.
Good luck with that...
