-They did away with private addressing (site-local) "because it breaks the openness of the internet and firewalls". Tell that one to someone who's seen hackers use a Java-based PS2 Video broadcasting software to send files across the internet. Lets automatically use public addresses on air-gapped networks.
No they didn't.
See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rf... - Site-local was the original spec and that's deprecated since it doesn't allow for easily merging of two existing private networks. ULA fixes that. So damn right you can have private networks.
The standard has changed so many times in the last 10 years nobody can comprehend it; every book has a different set of material on it, every programmer has set their infrastructure up differently.
Oh please. Only things that have really fundamentally changed are the IPv4IPv6 transition mechanism. Now that NAT64 and DNS64 are in use, you can pretty much work with an IPv6-only network (ironically, a couple years ago everything else, including gaming, worked via a NAT64, except for Skype, which is supposed to go through anything)
They did away with IPV4's simplistic subnetting and supernetting, and introduced EUI-64 addressing which can track devices as they move from network to network. Marketing companies like Google and Microsoft were helping to write the standard.
Oh please, even Windows uses privacy extensions for IPv6. No one forces you to use EUI-64.
Very Few large deployments.
Tell that to the Chinese. They have *huge* networks, IPv6 only.